JUDGMENT :

JITENDRA KUMAR, J.

The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to initiate departmental proceeding against the police officials and Judicial Magistrate. The petitioners are also seeking initiation of contempt proceeding against the police officials.

2. The factual background of the case is that one police case bearing Amarpur P.S. Case No. 284 of 2021 was lodged on 13.06.2021 for offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on the report of Smt. Shalini Sharma/ Respondent No.11, who is wife of petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar. It further transpires that vide order dated 22.06.2021 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate issued show cause to the concerned Investigating Officer why Section 498A of I.P.C. was not applied in the said F.I.R. despite sufficient allegation in the F.I.R. by the informant. Subsequently on 22.06.2021 petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar was arrested and thereafter, on 23.06.2021 Section 498A of IPC was added by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on application of the police and after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted on 08.08.2021 only against petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar keeping investigation pending against rest accused persons who are family members of petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar. Subsequently on 02.11.2021 cognizance was taken against the petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar for offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307 and 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It further transpires that on 18.01.2022 the petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar was released on regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is also stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that one Criminal Miscellaneous No. 12667 of 2022 has been filed by the petitioners including Rajiv Kumar under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing of the F.I.R.

3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar was arrested on 22.06.2021 in a case in which the petitioners were alleged to have committed offence punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and the maximum punishment provided for the alleged offence is below seven years and in view of direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, as reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, the police is not authorized to arrest the accused without compliance of Section 41A Cr.PC. Hence, the arrest is illegal and hence, the concerned police officials and the concerned Judicial Magistrate have committed contempt of Court and hence, proceeding for contempt of Court of Hon’ble Supreme Court be initiated against the police officials as well as Judicial Magistrate. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that police officials and Judicial Magistrate are also liable for departmental proceeding in view of violation of direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court as given in Arnesh Kumar Case (supra).

5. However, learned APP for the State submits that even if it is presumed that arrest made by the police was illegal and remand made by the Judicial Magistrate was also not sustainable in the eye of law, neither the arrest by the police nor the remand by the Judicial Magistrate was challenged prior to filing of the regular bail application by the petitioner No.2/Rajiv Kumar before this Court and till date, the remand order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate is unchallenged. As such, the remand order is still absolute for want of any challenge against this order before any Higher Court and hence, arrest stands legal. Hence, it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioner to say that arrest was illegal and contempt and departmental proceeding are required to be initiated against the police officials and the Judicial Magistrate. Had the petitioner challenged the arrest or remand before competent Court, the compliance or no compliance of