HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9621 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondents and perused the material placed on record. 2. In view of the proposed order being passed, notice to respondent No.3 is hereby dispensed with. 3. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers :- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned first information report lodged by the opposite party no.3 on 26.9.2025 vide F.I.R. No.443 of 2025, under section- 75 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023, Sections 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Sections 3 (1) (b), 3 (2) (v-a) of S.C.S.T. Act, at Police Station-Khairi Ghat, District- Bahraich, as contained in Annexure no.1 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties no.1 and 2 not to arrest or adopt any coercive measures against the petitioner on the basis of impugned first information report lodged by the opposite party no.3 on 26.9.2025 vide F.I.R. No.443 of 2025, under section- 75 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023, Sections 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Sections 3 (1) (b), 3 (2) (v-a) of S.C.S.T. Act, at Police Station-Khairi Ghat, District- Bahraich, as contained in Annexure no.1 to this writ petition, in the light of judgment and order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Arnesh Kumar Versus State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in FIR have maximum punishment for the term having less than Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shailendra Pathak, Km. Anjali Gautam Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shiv Naresh Yadav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest him, which is against the mandates of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent-State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner, entail sentence of less than seven years, the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are to be strictly followed in terms of judgments rendered by the 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. 6. Considering the settled law on the subject and the aforesaid stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner states that this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts. 7. 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 cases of Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 8. However, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 16.10.2025 at 11.00 AM sharp for the purpose to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, he shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which, the interim protection granted in this order may be withdrawn on an appropriate application being filed by the prosecution or by the complainant. October 10, 2025 Ashish Dewal CRLP No. 9621 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench