ARYAN JAISWAL AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
CRLP/19850/2025 · 2025-09-07
Pramod Kumar Srivastava, Vivek Kumar Birla
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 91115 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 91115 (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. - 19850 of 2025 Court No. - 42 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, J.
HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Kumar Ashutosh Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 22.05.2025, registered as Case Crime No.103 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, 2023, PS Kydganj, District Prayagraj, and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.
3. Although the prayer for quashing of FIR has been made, but without insisting on the same, only submission is that all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years, therefore the police authorities are bound to follow the procedure laid down under Section 35 BNSS. The petitioners have been wrongly implicated and could not be arrested. Reliance has been placed on the judgement of Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2017 and in Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCC 51 and co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhil Tiwari, Kumar Ashutosh Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Aryan Jaiswal And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
others in 2021 (2) ACR 1147.
4. We have gone through the impugned first information report and without interfering in the same, we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgement are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.
5. Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in terms of the judgements as noted above. September 8, 2025 S.A.
CRLP No. 19850 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Vivek Kumar Birla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad