'Mockery Of Criminal Jurisprudence': Allahabad HC Deplores Issuance Of S. 160 CrPC Notice To Accused, 17 Years After Lodging Of FIR

Calling it a mockery of the criminal jurisprudence, the Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi and Justice Gajendra Kumar protected the 5 accused and also gave them the liberty to apply for anticipatory bail in the matter.

The Court was essentially dealing with a criminal writ petition filed by Devendra Singh and 4 others seeking protection from the court after receiving a notice from the UP Police under Section 160 of CrPC, asking them to record their statement.

For context, Section 160 of CrPC provides that a Police Officer, making an investigation into a case, may, by an order in writing, require the attendance before himself, of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case.

Petitioner no. 1 (Devendra Singh) retired as Gram Panchayat Vikas Adhikari, petitioner no. 2 (Parashuram) also superannuated from the post of ADO (Panchayat), petitioner no.3 (Ram Kishun) retired as Block Pramukh and respondent no.4 and 5, were Kotedar at the relevant point of time.

Before the Court, it was submitted that the said notice under Section 160 CrPC was after the lapse of 17 years, the investigation is still going on without any cogent result.

It was further submitted that the petitioners are more than willing and ready to cooperate in the investigation provided their interests are protected.

Against the backdrop of these facts, the Court, at the outset disapproved of notices issued to the petitioner 17 years after the lodging of FIR. The Court observed thus:

“We have seen the allegation and accusation made in the FIR. After 17 years of lodging of the FIR, this exercise, being carried out by the police, is strange and mockery of the criminal jurisprudence.”

Hence, the Court directed that the interest of the petitioners be protected for a period of one month with the liberty that in case, they apply for anticipatory bail, their anticipatory bail be considered sympathetically, keeping in view that the petitioner no. 1 has already attained the age of superannuation and the matter relates to the year 2006, by the court concerned within a period of one week of its filing.

However, the Court made it open that the petitioners would cooperate with the investigation. With this observation, the present writ petition stood disposed of.

Advocate Kamendra Singh appeared for the petitioners.

Case title - Devendra Singh And 4 Others vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7901 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 174

Click Here To Read/Download Order