Allahabad High Court
KAVITA TYAGI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court held that the police must follow the Arnesh Kumar guidelines and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. in any arrest, and disposed the petition with that direction.
Summary
The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking quash of an FIR dated 12‑09‑2026 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 when making any arrest. The State opposed the merits of the petition but did not object to the innocuous prayer regarding arrest procedure. 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.S. The writ petition was consequently disposed with a direction to the authorities to follow the prescribed arrest procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 12‑09‑2026 can be quashed under the applicable provisions.
- Whether the petitioners can be directed not to be arrested pending trial.
- Whether the police must adhere to the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. while effecting an arrest.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- writ petition
- criminal procedure
- arrest guidelines
- Arnesh Kumar case
- Section 35(3)
- B.N.S. Act
- FIR quash
- High Court of Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23464 of 2026
Kavita Tyagi And 3 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jitendra Singh, Vikesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anita Tripathi, G.A., Sanjay Kumar
Mishra
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 12.09.2026, registered as
Case Crime No. 274 of 2026, under Sections 318 (4), 352, 351 (2) of
B.N.S., Police Station Madhuban, District Ghaziabad (contained as
Annexure No.1 to this writ petition).
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in Case Crime No. 274 of
2026, under Sections 318 (4), 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station -
Madhuban, District Ghaziabad."
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 counsel for respondent no.3 and learned A.G.A.
appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the petition on
merits but they have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by
learned counsel for the petitioners.
CRLP No. 23464 of 2026
2
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr.
Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no.3 and Mr. S.K.
Ojha, 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
Atul
Digitally signed by :-
ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…