HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9629 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents No.1, 2 and perused the material placed on record. 2. In view of the proposed order being passed, notice to respondents 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 impugned FIR dated 18.09.2025 got registered by the O.P. No.2 as Case Crime No.22 of 2025 U/S 120B I.P.C. and Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered at Police Station Lucknow Sector (Vigilance Act), District Lucknow as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Opposite Party No.2 to not make arrest of petitioner in pursuance to the impugned FIR dated 18.09.2025 got registered by the O.P. No.2 as Case Crime No.22 of 2025 U/S 120B I.P.C. and Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered at Police Station Lucknow Sector (Vigilance Act), District Lucknow and also direct the Opposite Parties to make a fair and impartial investigation in the present case in accordance with law." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in F.I.R. have maximum punishment for the term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas the police are attempting to arrest him, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Yogendra Pratap Singh, Jaibind Singh Rathour Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Devendra Singh Rathore .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) which is contrary to the mandate of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent- State has submitted on behalf of investigating agency that since the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner entail a sentence of less than seven years, the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed, in accordance with the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another : (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and another : (2022) 10 SCC 51. 6. 6. Considering the stand taken by the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner states that let this petition may be disposed of in view of the above-mentioned facts. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 8. However, it is directed that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 16.10.2025 at 11:00 A.M. sharp for the purpose of cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, he shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which the protection granted under this order shall not be available to him. October 10, 2025 Shubhankar CRLP No. 9629 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench