Allahabad High Court
BABLOOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court directed the authorities to ensure that any arrest of the petitioner complies with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Babloo filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an FIR dated 03.05.2026 under Sections 316(2) and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and to restrain his arrest. The petitioner also made an innocuous prayer that the police follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before making any arrest. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer. The High Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, allowed the innocuous prayer and directed the police to adhere to the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and to Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. while arresting the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed with the said direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the police must follow the Supreme Court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before arresting the petitioner.
- Whether the court can direct compliance with Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. in the present case.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- arrest
- FIR quash
- criminal procedure
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Section 35(3)
- Supreme Court direction
- writ petition
- criminal miscellaneous
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22457 of 2026
Babloo
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Singh
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 03.05.2026 in Case Crime
No.137 of 2026, under Sections 316(2), 351(2) of BNS, Police Station
Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj and for a direction to the respondents
not to arrest the petitioner 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, 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, Mr.
Rizwan, 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 petitioners, we are
inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the
CRLP No. 22457 of 2026
2
petitioner.
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…