Allahabad High Court
MOHD ISLAM AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court allowed the innocuous prayer and directed the authorities to follow the Arnesh Kumar arrest guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Petitioners Mohammed Islam and eight others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 06‑09‑2026 registered under several sections of the B.N.S.S. and the Dowry Prohibition Act, and to obtain a direction that they not be arrested. They prayed that the police follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before making any arrest. The State opposed the quash‑petition but did not object to the limited, or “innocuous,” prayer regarding arrest procedure. The Court, noting the lack of objection to the innocuous prayer, allowed it and directed the police to comply with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. The writ petition was thereafter disposed with the said direction, without granting the relief to quash the FIR.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 06‑09‑2026 can be quashed on the grounds pleaded by the petitioners.
- Whether the police must follow the arrest guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before arresting the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 115(2), 351(3), 352, 35(3), 75, 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR
- arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- writ petition
- quash FIR
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22433 of 2026
Mohd Islam And 8 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rahul Saxena
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 06.09.2026 in Case Crime
No.474 of 2026, under Sections 85, 75, 115(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS and
Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Nawabganj, 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, 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 Mr. Shubham Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners, Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, 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
CRLP No. 22433 of 2026
2
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
SK Srivastava
Digitally signed by :-
SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…