RANJIT Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State-respondents at length.

(2.) The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner has challenged the legality, propriety, and validity of the impugned First Information Report dtd. 18/2/2025, registered as Case Crime No.0071 of 2025, under Sec. 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the BNS 2023 and Sec. 3/4 D.P. Act at Police Station Thathiya, District Budaun. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction restraining the police authorities from effecting his arrest pursuant to the aforesaid impugned F.I.R.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the F.I.R. in question is founded upon false and frivolous allegations, and even if the entire contents of the F.I.R. are taken on their face value, no offence is made out against the petitioner. He further contends that the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment for a term of seven years or less, and as such, the procedural safeguards enshrined under Sec. 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?now replaced by Ss. 35 and 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., 2023?are squarely attracted. It is, therefore, incumbent upon the police authorities to act in strict compliance with the said statutory provisions before taking any coercive action against the petitioner.