SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(UK) 335

SUDHANSHU DHULIA
AMAN JOSHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Nalin Saun, Advocate
For the Respondents: Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Brief Holder

JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

1. Mr. Nalin Saun, Advocate, present for the petitioner.

2. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Brief Holder, present for the State/respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

3. The First Information Report has been lodged by respondent No. 3, which has been registered as Case Crime No.87 of 2018, under Sections 381 and 420 of IPC, at Police Station-Prem Nagar, District-Dehradun implicating the present petitioner. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has approached this Court for relief.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of offence and since the maximum punishment in these offences are seven years or less, a limited interference is called for in the matter.

5. The writ petition stands disposed with the direction to the police authorities to proceed with the investigation in accordance with law, subject to the full cooperation of the petitioner in the investigation, but as far as the arrest of the petitioner is concerned, the same may be done only under the parameters as framed under Section 41 and Section 41A of Cr.P.C. as well as following the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top