Allahabad High Court
KESHAV RAJPUT AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the authorities to follow the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. while arresting the petitioners.
Summary
Petitioners Keshav Rajput and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 15‑08‑2026 and a direction that they not be arrested. They prayed that the police follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 before making any arrest. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer regarding the arrest procedure. The High Court, noting the lack of objection, allowed the innocuous 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 petition was disposed with this direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction that police follow the Arnesh Kumar guidelines before arresting them.
- Whether the FIR dated 15‑08‑2026 can be quashed.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 35(3)
Subjects
- arrest procedure
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- FIR quash
- criminal writ petition
- Section 35(3)
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21338 of 2026
Keshav Rajput And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Tiwari Ajay 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 15.08.2026 in Case Crime No.669
of 2026, under Sections 318 (2) of BNS Police Station Indrapuram District
Trans Hindan (Commissionerate Ghaziabad) 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
petitioner 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. K.P. Pathak, 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.
CRLP No. 21338 of 2026
2
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.
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
September 8, 2026
C. MANI
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDRAMANI VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…