Allahabad High Court
NEERAJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that while the FIR was not quashed, any arrest must be effected in strict compliance with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners challenged a First Information Report dated 16‑07‑2026, filed under Sections 331(1), 329(3) and 223(B) of the B.N.S.S., seeking its quash and a direction that they not be arrested. The petitioner’s counsel also made an innocuous prayer that any arrest should follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. The State, represented by the learned A.G.A., opposed the quash of the FIR but raised no objection to the innocuous prayer. The Court, after hearing both sides, 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 writ petition was therefore disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 16‑07‑2026 under Sections 331(1), 329(3) and 223(B) of the B.N.S.S. can be quashed.
- Whether the arrest of the petitioners must be carried out in accordance with the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
- 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)
Subjects
- FIR quash
- Arrest procedure
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Section 35(3) B.N.S.S.
- Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22428 of 2026
Neeraj
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : 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 16.07.2026 in Case Crime
No.0371 of 2026, under Sections 331 (1), 329 (3), 223 (B) of BNS, Police
Station Panaki, Paschimi Commissionerate District Kanpur Nagpur 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 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, 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 petitioner.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, 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 inclined to allow
the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
CRLP No. 22428 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…