Allahabad High Court
ARVIND GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The FIR discloses a prima facie commission of offence and therefore cannot be quashed.
Summary
The petitioner, Arvind Gupta, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 10‑08‑2026 registered under Sections 318(4) and 62 of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The High Court examined the FIR and held that it disclosed a prima facie commission of offence, rendering the prayer to quash untenable in line with Supreme Court precedents. Consequently, the Court declined to interfere with the FIR. However, noting that the offences carry a maximum imprisonment of seven years, the Court directed that any arrest of the petitioner must strictly comply with Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41‑A of the CrPC, Sections 35(3)‑35(7) of the B.N.S., 2023, and the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and a prior Allahabad High Court order. The petition was therefore disposed of without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR can be quashed on the ground of lack of prima facie evidence of an offence.
- Whether the arrest, if effected, must adhere to the procedural safeguards under CrPC and the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as interpreted in Supreme Court and High Court precedents.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35(3), 35(4), 35(5), 35(6), 35(7)
- B.N.S., 2023
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41(1)(b), 41-A
Subjects
- FIR quash
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Arrest guidelines
- Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita
- Supreme Court precedent
- High Court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20241 of 2026
Arvind Gupta
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Kumar Upadhyay
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 45
HON'BLE SALIL KUMAR RAI, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the A.G.A. for the State.
The present petition has been filed challenging the First Information
Report dated 10.08.2026 registered as Case Crime No. 82 of 2026, under
Sections 318(4), 62 B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Swaroop Nagar, District
Kanpur Nagar.
We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses commission of
offence and therefore, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be
entertained in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases
of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2
SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and as
such, we are of the view that no interference is warranted.
However, considering the fact that all the offences, complained of in the
impugned FIR, are punishable with a term up to seven years, therefore, in
case of effecting the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned
FIR, it is directed that the respondents/ authorities shall ensure that the
specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of
CrPC/Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
and the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh
Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 as well as the directions
issued in judgement and order dated 28.01.2021 of this Court passed in
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3
CRLP No. 20241 of 2026
2
Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147,
be strictly complied with.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed
of.
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Salil Kumar Rai,J.)
September 18, 2026
Nisha
Digitally signed by :-
nisha kumari
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…