Allahabad High Court
TULSI SINGH YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The FIR shows a prima facie commission of offence and therefore cannot be quashed.
Summary
The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 01.08.2026 that alleged offences under sections 329(1), 352 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita. The High Court examined the FIR and held that it disclosed a prima facie case of commission of offence, rendering the prayer to quash untenable in line with Supreme Court precedents. While refusing to set aside the FIR, the Court directed that any arrest of the petitioners must strictly comply with Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41‑A of the Criminal Procedure Code, Sections 35(3)‑35(7) of the B.N.S., and the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and its own earlier order in W.P. No. 17732 of 2020. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. The Court emphasized adherence to procedural safeguards during arrest for offences punishable with up to seven years’ imprisonment.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR can be quashed when it discloses a prima facie case of offence.
- Whether the procedural safeguards under Section 41(1)(b) and 41‑A of the Cr.P.C. and Sections 35(3)‑35(7) of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita apply to the arrest of the petitioners.
- Whether the guidelines issued in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar are binding on the investigating authorities in this case.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 329(1), 351(3), 352, 35(3), 35(4), 35(5), 35(6), 35(7)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41(1)(b), 41-A
Subjects
- quash FIR
- prima facie case
- arrest procedure
- Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- high court writ petition
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20258 of 2026
Tulsi Singh Yadav And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilendra Yadav, Animesh Shukla,
Vishal Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 45
HON'BLE SALIL KUMAR RAI, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
The present petition has been filed challenging the First Information
Report dated 01.08.2026 registering Case Crime No. 254 of 2026, under
Section 329(1), 352 and 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station-Nonahra, District-
Ghazipur.
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
Cr.P.C/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
Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147,
CRLP No. 20258 of 2026
2
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
Anurag/-
Digitally signed by :-
ANURAG KUMAR VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…