Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9508 (UTT)

RAHUL KHANNA AND ANR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

WPCRL/797/2025 · 2025-07-29

Pankaj Purohit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPCRL No.797 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Rishab Ranghar, Advocate for the petitioners. 2. Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State. 3. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have impugned FIR No.0107 of 2025 dated 15.07.2025, under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of B.N.S. 2023, registered at Police Station Dalanwala, District Dehradun. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has limited his argument to the extent that the investigation agency should comply with the guidelines given in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. 5. Since offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of B.N.S. 2023 carries a punishment upto seven years, therefore before resorting to any arrest, a prior notice under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 (under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C.) is necessary to be issued to the petitioners. Hence, it is provided that before taking any coercive measure against the petitioners, the Investigating Officer shall abide by procedure given under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. Act, 2023 (under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C.) 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed-off. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed-off accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 29.07.2025 SK