Allahabad High Court
BANI SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the police to follow the Arnesh Kumar arrest guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., disposing the petition with that direction.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking quashment of an FIR dated 29.06.2026 under Section 326(d) of the B.N.S.S. and sections 2 and 3 of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, and requested that the police not arrest them. They prayed that any arrest should follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer regarding arrest procedure. The Court, noting the lack of objection to the prayer, allowed the request and directed the authorities to adhere to the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. for any arrest. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR under Section 326(d) of the B.N.S.S. and sections 2/3 of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act should be quashed.
- Whether the police must follow the arrest guidelines prescribed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before making an arrest.
- Whether a direction under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. is appropriate in the present case.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 35(3)
- Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act — s. 2, 3
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR quashment
- arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar
- Section 326(d)
- public property damage
- High Court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21761 of 2026
Bani Singh And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Kumar Pathak, Saurabh Kumar
Pandey
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 29.06.2026 in Case Crime No.136
of 2026, under Section 326 (d) of BNS and 2/3 of Prevention of Damages to
Public Property Act, Police Station Gorai, District Aligarh 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 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. Rizwan Ahmad, 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
CRLP No. 21761 of 2026
2
prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, we are inclined to allow
the innocuous prayer made by learned 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.
(Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)
September 17, 2026
C. MANI
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDRAMANI VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…