Allahabad High Court
MOHD ISLAM AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed that the police must adhere to the Arnesh Kumar guidelines for arrest and disposed the writ petition with that direction.
Summary
The petitioners, Mohd Islam and another, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashment of an FIR dated 23 July 2026 under Section 420 IPC. They prayed that before any arrest, the police should adhere to the Supreme Court's guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. The State, represented by the learned A.G.A., opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer regarding arrest procedure. The Court, noting the lack of objection to the innocuous prayer, allowed the petitioners' request and directed the authorities to follow the Arnesh Kumar guidelines for any arrest. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with a direction to ensure compliance with the specified procedural safeguards.
Issues considered
- Whether the police must follow the Arnesh Kumar guidelines before arresting the petitioners under the FIR of Section 420 IPC
- Whether the FIR should be quashed on the basis of procedural irregularities in arrest
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 35(3)
Subjects
- Arrest procedure
- Section 420 IPC
- FIR quashment
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 19508 of 2026
Mohd Islam And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s) : 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 prayer to quash the
impugned First Information Report dated 23.07.2026 in Case Crime No.108
of 2026, under Section 420 IPC, Police Station Jansath, District
Muzaffarnagar.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners after some length of
arguments on merits made an innocuous prayer that before arresting the
petitioners 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, Mr. S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State
vehemently opposed the petition on merits but he has no objection to the
innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned
A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.
5. Taking into consideration the submissions and prayer made by learned
counsel for the petitioners and no objection by learned A.G.A. on innocuous
prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, we are inclined to allow
the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
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
CRLP No. 19508 of 2026
2
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 9, 2026
C. MANI
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDRAMANI VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…