MERAJ AND 2 OTHERS v. THE STATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS
CRLP/22461/2025 · 2025-10-27
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 172328 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 172328 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22461 of 2025 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J.
1. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 13.09.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 93 of 2025, under Sections 110, 352, 351(2) BNS, Police Station- Kohana, District- Kanpur Nagar and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of aforesaid impugned First Information Report.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners after some length of arguments on merits submitted that all the aforesaid offences are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years and 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 and Mr. Manoj Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3 vehemently opposed the petition on merits but have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3, 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Sahu Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Manoj Srivastava Meraj And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) The State Of Up And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
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./ /41-A Cr.P.C.
October 28, 2025 S.K.S.
CRLP No. 22461 of 2025 2 (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUNIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad