Allahabad High Court
RAJKUMAR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the writ petition is disposed with a direction that the arrest of the petitioners must be carried out in accordance with the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Rajkumar and three others, filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 23‑06‑2026 registered under sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 118(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and to restrain their arrest. They made an innocuous prayer that the police follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 before making any arrest. The State opposed the petition on its merits but did not object to the innocuous prayer. The Court, noting the lack of objection, allowed the prayer and directed the authorities to ensure that any arrest complies with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. The writ petition was therefore disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR registered against the petitioners can be quashed under the challenged sections of the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether the Court should direct the police to follow the arrest procedure laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 352
- B.N.S.S. — s. 35(3)
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR
- arrest guidelines
- writ petition
- quash
- Arnesh Kumar judgment
- Section 35(3)
- B.N.S.
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21231 of 2026
Rajkumar And 3 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Dohare,
Sunil Kumar
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 23.06.2026 as
Case Crime No. 320 of 2026 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2),
118(1) of B.N.S., 2023 Police Station-Handia, District-
Ganganagar (Commissionerate Prayagraj) and for a direction to
the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of
impugned First Information Report.
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 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 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 innocuous
prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners 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. 21231 of 2026
2
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 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 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
Shweta
Digitally signed by :-
SWETA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…