Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Zeeshan Ali vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. ... on 29 February, 2024
Bench: Rajan Roy, Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:18712-DB Court No. - 9 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7516 of 2023 Petitioner :- Mohd. Zeeshan Ali Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Muballi Gussalam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mihammad Kaleem,Mohd. Nafees,Sabih Ahmed Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard Mohd. Muballigus Salam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri S.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Sabih Ahmed, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 4.
The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing First Information Report bearing Case Crime No. 0423 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 313 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Wazirganj, District- Lucknow.
Learned A.G.A. has instruction to inform the Court that the offence which was committed outside India referable to Section 313 IPC has been dropped as no evidence was available. Rest of the offences have been committed inside India, therefore, Section 188 Cr.P.C. is not attracted.
Shri Sabih Ahmed, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 4 has placed before us a decision reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 321; Sartaj Khan Vs. State of Uttrakhand on Section 188 Cr.P.C., according to which, Section 188 Cr.P.C. gets attracted when the entirety of the offence is committed outside India and not otherwise.
If part of the offence has been committed in India, then, Section 188 Cr.P.C. would not be attracted.
At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner confines his prayer to protection prescribed under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.
The said protection is statutorily available in cases where the sentence regarding an offence is of seven or less than seven years, therefore, the police is obliged to extend the benefit of the said provision wherever attracted and no specific direction is required.
If during investigation any other section is added then the law will take its own course, meaning thereby, if the provisions contained in Section 41 or 41-A are not attracted to the said offence/section, then, it shall be open for the police to proceed accordingly.
In the event any new section is added carrying a sentence of more than seven years, it shall be open for the petitioner to approach this Court or to seek such other remedies as may be prescribed under law.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
In view of the order passed hereinabove, the objection that the writ petition itself is not maintainable, is meaningless because Section 41-A Cr.P.C. is enshrined in the statute itself and this Court has not given any additional direction.
.
(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 29.2.2024 R.K.P.