Allahabad High Court
DHEERENDRA KUMAR BIND @ DHEERENDRA BINDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The FIR disclosed a cognizable offence and could not be quashed, but the police were directed to adhere to arrest guidelines and not harass the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner sought to quash an FIR dated 14‑07‑2026 under sections 281, 125(a) and 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and later limited the relief to protection under section 35 of the same Act. The Court examined the FIR and found it disclosed a cognizable offence, relying on Supreme Court precedents (State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra) that such FIRs cannot be set aside. Consequently, no interference with the FIR was ordered. However, the Court directed the police to follow the arrest guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and to refrain from harassing the petitioner during the investigation. The petitioner was instructed to cooperate with the investigation. The writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Can the FIR dated 14‑07‑2026 be quashed under sections 281, 125(a) and 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023?
- Is protection under section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, warranted in the present circumstances?
- Should the court intervene in the police’s arrest procedure and investigation conduct?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 125(a), 125(b), 281, 35
Subjects
- FIR quash
- cognizable offence
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- section 35 protection
- arrest guidelines
- police harassment
- high court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21544 of 2026
Dheerendra Kumar Bind @ Dheerendra Bind
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Kumar Tiwari, Ram Yash Chauhan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 44
HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.
HON'BLE JAI KRISHNA UPADHYAY, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State-respondents.
2. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the First Information
Report dated 14.07.2026 giving rise to Case Crime No.0215 of 2026, under Sections
281, 125(a), 125(b) of B.N.S, 2023, Police Station - Mugra Badhshahpur, District -
Jaunpur, but at the time when the matter is taken up learned counsel for the petitioner
confines his relief to grant of protection under section 35 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
3. We have perused the the First Information Report, which prima facie discloses
commissioning of cognizable offence and, therefore, the prayer made to quash F.I.R.
otherwise cannot be entertained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in
the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021)
SCC Online SC 315.
4. We are of the view that no interference is warranted.
5. However, considering the fact that all offences mentioned in the present case are
punishable with a term up to 7 years, the authorities are directed 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.
6. It is expected of the police not to harass the petitioner till the conclusion of the
investigation in any manner whatsoever. However, the petitioner shall co-operate in
the investigation.
7. The writ petition, accordingly, is disposed of.
September 9, 2026
vijay krishna
(Jai Krishna Upadhyay,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…