HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9924 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J. 1. Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State/opposite parties and Sri Ajeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate who has filed 'Vakalatnama' on behalf of opposite party no. 4, same is taken on record. 2. By means of this petition the petitioners seek following relief : "(i) Issue writ order in nature of mandamus commanding to concern opposite parties not to harass the petitioners and their family members and also not to interfere in peaceful life of the petitioners. (ii) Quash the FIR No. 0414 of 2025, dated 01.09.2025, registered under Sections 131, 352, and 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda, as the same is false, malicious, and liable to be quashed;" 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the deponent of the present writ petition is the prosecutrix herself, therefore, section 137(2) BNS is not made out. 4. The prosecutrix has stated that she has got married with the petitioner Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Suresh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Gulchaman And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) no. 2. However, learned counsel for the informant has stated that the petitioner no. 2 (Lalit) is already married, therefore, he cannot marry with the prosecutrix. He has further submitted that even if the petitioner no. 2 (Lalit) is willing to get married with the prosecutrix who is of different religion, the recourse of Special Marriage Act will have to be taken. 5. Be that as it may, since the offence under which the F.I.R. is lodged is having punishment up to seven years and the prosecutrix has herself filed that affidavit so in the light of dictum of Apex Court in re: Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 the petitioners are entitled to get relief. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the offences as alleged in FIR have maximum punishment for the term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest him, which is against the mandates of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 7. Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent-State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners, entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed in terms of judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in re ; Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another : (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021 : (2022) 10 SCC 51. 8. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioners states that let this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts. 9. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the law as laid down by Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 10. However, It is directed that the petitioners shall appear before the CRLP No. 9924 of 2025 2 Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 17.11.2025 at 11.00 a.m. sharp for the purpose to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, they shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which, the protection of this order would be withdrawn on the application being moved by the prosecution or the complainant. November 10, 2025 Om CRLP No. 9924 of 2025 3 (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench