Allahabad High Court
SHADAB ANWAR KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court declined to quash the FIR but directed that any arrest of the petitioners must strictly adhere to the guidelines of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. Act.
Summary
The petitioners sought to quash an FIR dated 14 July 2026 and to restrain the police from arresting them, invoking the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to an innocuous prayer that the police follow those guidelines before any arrest. The Court, noting the lack of objection to the prayer, allowed it and directed the authorities to ensure arrests are made in compliance with the Arnesh Kumar principles and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. Act. No order was made to quash the FIR. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with the specified direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 14-07-2026 can be quashed by a writ of certiorari.
- Whether the police should be restrained from arresting the petitioners pending compliance with Supreme Court guidelines.
- Whether the High Court can direct the police to follow the arrest procedure laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 35(3)
Subjects
- Criminal Procedure Code
- FIR quash
- Arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar principle
- Writ of certiorari
- Mandamus
- High Court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18223 of 2026
Shadab Anwar Khan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Kumar Verma, Dinesh Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Imran Khan, G.A.
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
1. The present writ petition has been preferred with the following main
reliefs:-
"I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the
impugned FIR dated 14.07.2026 in Case Crime No. 328 of 2026, under
Sections 318(4), 352, 351(3) BNS 2023, Police Station Prem Nagar,
District Jhansi (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition).
II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to
respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned
F.I.R. and not adopt any coercive action against the petitioners."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner after some length of
arguments on merits made an innocuous prayer that before arresting the
petitioner police may be directed to follow the principle laid down by
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar
reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273.
3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State
vehemently opposed the petition on merits but he has no objection to the
innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Imran
Khan, learned counsel for respondent no.3 and Mr. S.N. Tiwari, learned
A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.
CRLP No. 18223 of 2026
2
5. Taking into consideration the submissions and prayer made by learned
counsel for the petitioner and no objection by learned A.G.A. on
innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, we are
inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the
petitioner.
6. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the authorities
concerned to ensure the procedure of arrest as per the guidelines of the
Supreme Court enshrined in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar
reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 and provision of Section 35(3) of B.N.S.S.
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
September 8, 2026
Atul
Digitally signed by :-
ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…