Allahabad High Court
SHUAIB ALIAS MOHAMMAD SHUAIBversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court did not quash the FIR but directed the police to follow the Arnesh Kumar arrest guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 31‑01‑2026 registered under sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 74 of the B.N.S.S. and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and to restrain his arrest. The petitioner also made an innocuous prayer that the police follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before making any arrest. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer. The Court, noting the lack of objection, allowed the innocuous prayer and directed the police to comply with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. The petition was disposed with this direction, without quashing the FIR.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 31‑01‑2026 should be quashed.
- Whether the court can direct the police to follow the arrest guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
- Whether Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. is applicable to the arrest procedure in the present case.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 115(2), 351(3), 352, 35(3), 74, 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- FIR
- quash
- arrest
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Section 35(3)
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- criminal procedure
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 19841 of 2026
Shuaib Alias Mohammad Shuaib
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Umair Mahmood
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Praveen Kumar
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 31.01.2026
lodged by the respondent no. 4, registered in Case crime no.0035
of 2026 Under section 85,115(2),352,351(3),74 of BNS and 3/4
of Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station Nehtaur, District Bijnor
and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner
in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.
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 principles 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 State
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,
learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the
record.
5. Taking into consideration the submissions and innocuous
prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and no
objection by learned A.G.A. appearing for the State-respondents,
we are inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned
CRLP No. 19841 of 2026
2
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.
September 14,
2026
Shweta (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SWETA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…