Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 92718 (ALL)

SATYA PRAKASH KOTHARI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/20188/2025 · 2025-10-07

Achal Sachdev, Siddhartha Varma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20188 of 2025 Court No. - 42 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State- respondents and Sri Pankaj Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. Although, the prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the First Information Report dated 25.07.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No.246 of 2025, under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station - New Agra, District - Agra, but at the time when the matter is taken up learned counsel for the petitioner confines his relief to grant of protection under section 35 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. We have perused the the First Information Report, which prima facie discloses commissioning of cognizable offence and, therefore, the prayer made to quash F.I.R. otherwise cannot be entertained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315. 4. We are of the view that no interference is warranted. 5. However, considering the fact that all offences mentioned in the present case are punishable with a term up to 7 years, the authorities are directed 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Mishra, Vijay Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Pankaj Dwivedi, Sunil Kumar Dubey Satya Prakash Kothari .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) (2014) 8 SCC 273. 6. It is expected of the police not to harass the petitioner till the conclusion of the investigation in any manner whatsoever. However, the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. October 8, 2025 M.S. Ansari CRLP No. 20188 of 2025 2 (Achal Sachdev,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD SAQIB ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad