Allahabad High Court
ADITYA KUMAR SINHA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed the petition, directing the police to follow the Arnesh Kumar arrest guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S, without quashing the FIR.
Summary
Petitioners Aditya Kumar Sinha and another filed a writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 06.07.2026 under Sections 308(2), 351(2) of the B.N.S.S and Section 67 of the IT Act, and a direction that they not be arrested. They also prayed that the police follow the Supreme Court's guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar regarding arrests. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer concerning arrest procedure. The Court, noting the lack of objection to the innocuous prayer, allowed it and directed the authorities to conduct any arrest in accordance with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. The petition was disposed with this direction, without quashing the FIR.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR under Sections 308(2), 351(2) of the B.N.S.S and Section 67 of the IT Act should be quashed.
- Whether the police must follow the arrest guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
- Whether a direction under Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S can be issued to regulate the arrest of the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 308(2), 351(2), 35(3)
- Information Technology Act — s. 67
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR quash
- arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar
- Section 35(3)
- writ petition
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21775 of 2026
Aditya Kumar Sinha And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nagendra Kumar Tripathi
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 06.07.2026 in Case Crime No.374
of 2026, under Sections 308 (2), 351 (2) of BNS and Section 67 of I.T. Act,
Police Station Hafijganj, District Bareilly 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. S.N. Tiwari, 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. 21775 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 17, 2026
C. MANI
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDRAMANI VERMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…