Allahabad High Court
PRATEEK @ PRIYANSHU @ PRATEEK JHAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed the petition, granting only the direction that the police follow the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., and declined to quash the FIR or restrain the arrest.
Summary
Petitioner Prateek Jha filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking (i) quash of an FIR dated 11/09/2026 under sections 318(4), 317(5) and 112(2) of the B.N.S., and (ii) a mandamus restraining his arrest pending the petition. The petitioner also made an innocuous prayer that the police follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer. The Court, after hearing counsel, 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 petition was disposed without granting the relief of quashing the FIR or restraining the arrest.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 11/09/2026 under sections 318(4), 317(5) and 112(2) of the B.N.S. should be quashed.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to restrain the arrest of the petitioner pending the petition.
- Whether the police must follow the arrest procedure prescribed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR quash
- arrest
- mandamus
- writ petition
- Arnesh Kumar guidelines
- Section 35(3)
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23435 of 2026
Prateek @ Priyanshu @ Prateek Jha
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bhriguram Ji, Deo Brat Pandey,
Prabhat Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking following main
reliefs:-
"(i) Issue, a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned First Information Report dated 11/09/2026 case crime no.
0259/2026, U/S- 318(4), 317(5), 112(2) B.N.S. P.S.- Kotwali, District Jhansi.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding to
the respondent no. 2 not to arrest the petitioner during the pendency of the
writ petition."
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 Mr. Anand Kumar, learned Advocate holding brief of Mr.
CRLP No. 23435 of 2026
2
Bhriguram Ji Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K.P.
Pathak, 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.
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 28, 2026
Saurabh
Digitally signed by :-
SAURABH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…