Allahabad High Court
SHIVAM SINGH RATHOREversusTHE STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the authorities to ensure that any arrest of the petitioner complies with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., but did not quash the FIR.
Summary
Shivam Singh Rathore filed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 06‑02‑2026 registered under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 125 and 127(2) of the B.N.S. and to obtain a direction that he not be arrested. He also prayed that the police, before making any arrest, follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar. The State opposed the petition on its merits but raised no objection to the innocuous prayer regarding arrest procedure. The Court, after hearing counsel, 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, without ordering the FIR to be quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 06‑02‑2026 can be quashed under the provisions of the B.N.S.
- Whether the police may arrest the petitioner in view of the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
- Whether a direction can be issued to the police to follow Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. before arresting the petitioner
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 115(2), 125, 127(2), 191(2), 351(3), 352, 35(3)
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR quash
- arrest
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Section 35(3)
- High Court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21375 of 2026
Shivam Singh Rathore
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar Rathore, Sanjeev
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 06.02.2026 in Case Crime
No.31 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 125, 127(2) of
BNS, Police Station Mohammadabad, District Farrukhabad 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 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, 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 petitioner.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. S.N.
Tiwari, 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 petitioner and no objection by learned A.G.A. on
innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, we are
CRLP No. 21375 of 2026
2
inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned 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.
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
September 8, 2026
SK Srivastava
Digitally signed by :-
SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…