Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

ROBIN KUMAR AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court disposed the petition, directing the police to follow the arrest guidelines of Arnesh Kumar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S., without quashing the FIR.

Summary

Petitioners Robin Kumar and two others filed a writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 26-11-2025 under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, and a direction that they not be arrested. They also prayed that the police follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar regarding arrests. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer concerning arrest procedure. The Court, noting the lack of objection, allowed the innocuous prayer and directed the authorities to adhere to the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. The petition was disposed with this direction, without quashing the FIR.

Issues considered

  • Whether the FIR dated 26-11-2025 under Sections 318(4), 319(2) B.N.S. and 66D IT Act should be quashed.
  • Whether the petitioners should be protected from arrest pending the trial.
  • Whether the police must follow the arrest guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • criminal procedure
  • FIR quash
  • arrest guidelines
  • certiorari
  • mandamus
  • Information Technology Act
  • B.N.S.
  • Arnesh Kumar principle

Judgment

            HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
            CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23437 of 2026

Robin Kumar And 2 Others
                                                                .....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                             .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                  :   Mohini, Virendra Singh
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) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the

impugned First Information Report dated 26.11.2025 arising out of Case

Crime No.0131 of 2025, Under Sections 318(4), 319(2) B.N.S. and Section

66D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, Police Station Cyber Crime

Police Station, District Gautam Buddha Nagar;


(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the

respondent Nos. 2 and 3 not to arrest the petitioners in Case Crime No.0131

of 2025, Under Sections 318(4), 319(2) Β.N.S. and Section 66D of Information

Technology (Amendment) Act, Police Station Cyber Crime Police Station,

District Gautam Buddha Nagar."


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
                                                                                       CRLP No. 23437 of 2026
                                                                 2

                                    vehemently opposed the petition on merits but he has no objection
                                    to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the
                                    petitioners.

                                    4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners,
                                    Mr. S.N. Tiwari, 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 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 28, 2026
                                    Saurabh




Digitally signed by :-
SAURABH KUMAR
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.