Allahabad High Court
AJAY KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the FIR cannot be quashed as it discloses a cognizable offence and therefore no interference is warranted.
Summary
Ajay Kumar Yadav filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash the FIR dated 23.08.2026 that gave rise to Case Crime No.0132 of 2026 under sections 125, 351(3) and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. During the hearing the petitioner limited his relief to protection under section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court examined the FIR and held that it disclosed a cognizable offence, making the prayer to quash untenable in view of the Supreme Court decisions in State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra. 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 writ petition was therefore disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 23.08.2026 can be quashed under a writ petition.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to protection under section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the police must adhere to the Supreme Court‑prescribed arrest guidelines in this case.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 125, 351(3), 352
Subjects
- quash of FIR
- cognizable offence
- section 35 protection
- arrest guidelines
- police harassment
- writ petition
- criminal miscellaneous
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21548 of 2026
Ajay Kumar Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 5 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
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 23.08.2026 giving rise to Case Crime No.0132 of 2026, under Sections
125, 351(3) and 352 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, Police Station - Mohana, District
- Siddhartha Nagar, 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…