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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4873

PATNA HIGH COURT
SATYAVRAT VERMA, J
Pankaj Sahni – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, A.P.P.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 01-12-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 365, 447 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. Learned APP for the State, at the outset, submits that the law is clear that where offences for which an FIR has been instituted carry punishment of seven years and less, the arrest is not automatic. It is further submitted that if the police intend to arrest an accused, who is implicated in a case relating to offences which carry punishment of seven years or less, in that event, the police have to resort to certain procedure as incorporated in the Cr.P.C., i.e., the police first have to give a notice under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. Learned APP next submits that anticipatory bail may or may not be maintainable after the accused receives notice under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. as it will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case because the police, even after issuance of notice under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C., cannot arrest the accused without seeking permission of the lea

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