JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the impugned Summoning Order dated 08.10.2020 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Gautambudh Nagar, in Criminal Case No. 24176 of 2018, Case Crime No.1105 of 2018, under Sections 332, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Sector- 20, Noida, District- Gautambudh Nagar.

3. The applicant is constable. He had filed his discharge application pursuant to order passed by this Court 05.02.2019 which has been dismissed.

4.Order dated 05.02.2019 reads as under:-

"Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Code') has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to quash the charge sheet No. 1 dated 18.09.2018 and entire criminal proceeding against the applicant before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in Case Crime No. 1105 of 2018, under Sections 332, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Noida Sector 20, District-Gautam Budh Nagar (State vs. Virendra Singh Yadav) as well as cognizance order dated 22.10.2018.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that first information report has been lodged with false allegation only to harass the applicant.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer made and contentions thereof raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant.

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet, the impugned cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case is hereby refused.

However, if applicant claims for discharge at appropriate stage, the same shall be decided by trial court by speaking order.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of."

5. The applicant is a constable and it is submitted that if he would be arrested in criminal matter for which he is facing trial and prosecution, he may suffer immense loss. As per Section 332 I.P.C. is concerned, it is punishable for three years As far as Section 323 I.P.C. is concerned, it is punishable with one year and fine and all the both. As far as Sections 504 I.P.C. and 506 I.P.C. is concerned, it is punishable for two years or with fine. As far as Section 506 I.P.C. is concern, it is punishable for two years or the fine, Part-II of 506 I.P.C. is punishable up to seven years and or fine. All these are within the preview of Section 41A of Cr.P.C. and as per the Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar And Others Vs. State Of U.P. And Others) decided on 28.01.2021 has considered the provisions of Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. and held that the accused shall not be arrested without following the procedure as envisaged in Section 41A of Cr.P.C., Wherein the Division Bench has observed as follows:-

Moreover, reliance on the judgements dated 04.09.2018 passed by Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2017. In which Hon’ble Supreme Court has also issued directions:

“20. We, therefore, direct the Magistrates/ Police authorities that when accused alleged with offence punishable up to 7 years imprisonment are produced before them remands may be granted to accused only after the Magistrate satisfies himself that the application for remand by the police officer has been m