Allahabad High Court
UDAY LAIKAR @ UDAY LIKHARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the police must adhere to the arrest guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S., and disposed of the petition without granting the reliefs sought.
Summary
The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quashment of an FIR dated 11‑09‑2026 under sections 318(4), 317(5) and 112(2) of the B.N.S., and a mandamus restraining his arrest pending the petition. The petitioner’s counsel also made an innocuous prayer that the police follow the arrest guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar. The State opposed the main reliefs but did not object to the innocuous prayer. The Court, noting the lack of objection, allowed the innocuous prayer and directed the police to comply with the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S. The petition was disposed without granting the quashment or mandamus reliefs.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 11‑09‑2026 under sections 318(4), 317(5) and 112(2) of the B.N.S. can be quashed.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to restrain the arrest of the petitioner during the pendency of 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.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 112(2), 317(5), 318(4), 35(3)
Subjects
- FIR quashment
- Arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar
- Mandamus
- Criminal writ petition
- Section 35(3) B.N.S.
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23462 of 2026
Uday Laikar @ Uday Likhar
.....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:-
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned First Information Report dated 11.09.2026 registered as Case
Crime No.0259 of 2026, under Sections 318(4), 317(5), 112(2) B.N.S.,
Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding to 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. 23462 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…