Allahabad High Court
AMAN AKHTAR @ AMAN KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the authorities must adhere to the Supreme Court’s arrest guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. when effecting any arrest.
Summary
Aman Akhtar filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking the quash of an FIR dated 11‑09‑2026 under Sections 318(4), 317(5) and 112(2) of the B.N.S. and a mandamus directing the police not to arrest him while the petition is pending. The petitioner’s counsel prayed that the police be directed to follow the Supreme Court guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. The learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer. The Court, noting the lack of objection, allowed the innocuous prayer and disposed of the petition, directing the authorities to ensure that any arrest complies with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 11‑09‑2026 can be quashed under the challenged sections of the B.N.S.
- Whether a mandamus can be issued to restrain the arrest of the petitioner during the pendency of the writ petition
- Whether the police must follow the arrest procedure prescribed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
Legislation cited
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR quash
- mandamus
- arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar case
- high court writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23452 of 2026
Aman Akhtar @ Aman Khan
.....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 present writ petition has been preferred with the following main
reliefs:-
"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing
the impugned First Information Report dated 11/09/2026 in Case Crime
No. 0259/2026, under Sections 318(4), 317(5), 112(2) Β.N.S., P.S.-
Kotwali, District Jhansi.
b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding to the respondent no.2 not to arrest the petitioner during
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 the 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. K.P.
Pathak, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the
record.
CRLP No. 23452 of 2026
2
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
Atul
Digitally signed by :-
ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…