RAVI CHAUDHARY ALIAS RAVI KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPCRL/849/2025 · 2025-08-06
Pankaj Purohit
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9836 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9836 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
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.849 of 2025 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Mr. Susheel Kumar, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State.
3. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has impugned the FIR No.0379 of 2025 dated 01.08.2025, lodged under Sections 120-B, 408, 420, 468 & 506 IPC, registered at P.S. SIDCUL, District Haridwar.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 the aforesaid offences carry a punishment maximum to seven years, therefore before resorting to any arrest, prior notice under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.) is necessary to be issued to the petitioner. Hence, it is provided that before taking any coercive measures against the petitioner, the Investigating Officer shall abide by procedure given under Section 35(3) of the BNSS Act, 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.)
6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
06.08.2025 AK