Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SUBHASH AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the FIR shows a prima facie commission of offence and therefore cannot be quashed.

Summary

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 22 July 2026 that alleged offences under sections 329(3), 324(4), 352 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita. The High Court examined the FIR and, relying on Supreme Court precedents (State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jellani and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra), held that the FIR disclosed a prima facie case and could not be quashed. Consequently, no interference with the investigation was ordered. However, because the alleged offences carry a maximum punishment of seven years, the Court directed the investigating authorities to strictly follow the safeguards under Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41‑A of the Criminal Procedure Code, Sections 35(3)‑35(7) of the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, and the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and a prior Allahabad High Court order. The writ petition was therefore disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the FIR can be quashed on the ground that it does not disclose a cognizable offence.
  • Whether the High Court may intervene in the arrest procedure under the Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita and the Criminal Procedure Code.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • FIR quash
  • Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Arrest safeguards
  • Section 41
  • Section 35
  • Supreme Court precedent
  • Writ petition
  • Criminal law

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
           CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22949 of 2026

Subhash And 6 Others
                                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others
                                                          .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)         : Shivang Shukla, Shubhang Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s)         : G.A.

Court No. - 45
                 HON'BLE SALIL KUMAR RAI, J.
                 HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.

1. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the A.G.A. for the State
respondents.

2. No notice is issued to respondent No.4 in view of the order proposed
to be passed.

3. The present petition has been filed challenging the First Information
Report dated 22.07.2026 registered as Case Crime No.0257 of 2026,
under Sections 329(3), 324(4), 352, and 351(3) of the B.N.S., Police
Station Fatehpur Sikari, District Agra.

4. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses commission of
offence and therefore, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be
entertained in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases
of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2
SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and as
such, we are of the view that no interference is warranted.

5. However, considering the fact that all the offences, complained of in
the impugned FIR, are punishable with a term up to seven years,
therefore, in case of effecting the arrest of the petitioners in pursuance of
the impugned FIR, it is directed that the respondents/authorities shall
ensure that the specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and
Section 41-A of Cr.P.C./Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagrika
                                                                                      CRLP No. 22949 of 2026
                                                                 2


                                    Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court
                                    in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8
                                    SCC 273 as well as the directions issued in judgement and order dated
                                    28.01.2021 of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.
                                    17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3
                                    Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147, be strictly complied with.

                                    6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands
                                    disposed of.



                                                          (Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Salil Kumar Rai,J.)
                                    September 30, 2026
                                    Rakesh




Digitally signed by :-
RAKESH MEHTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.