AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 204 wordsPankaj Purohit, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By means of this criminal writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned First Information Report No.1073 of 2024 dated 22.10.2024, registered with Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar under Section 137(2) of the B.N.S. Act, 2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner limited his argument to the extent that the offence imputed against the petitioner carries maximum sentence of 07 years, therefore, he should be dealt with in accordance with the provision of Section 35(3) of the BNSS Act 2023, which is akin to the provision of Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C.
Learned State Counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 & 4 have no objection to this proposition submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of and it is provided that the Investigating officer shall serve the notice to petitioner under Section 35(3) of B.N.S.S., 2023 (under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.) as per the mandate of the law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.