Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 95388 (ALL)

BECHAN YADAV AND 5 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/20624/2025 · 2025-09-21

Abdul Shahid, 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. - 20624 of 2025 Court No. - 43 HON'BLE SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J. HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA for the State. 2. Although prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the First Information Report registered on 21.8.2025 as Case Crime No. 119 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station - Baburi, District Chandauli, but at the time when the matter is taken up learned counsel for the petitioners confines his relief to grant of protection under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. We have perused the the First Information Report which prima facie discloses 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, therefore, authorities are directed to ensure the procedure of arrest as per the guidelines of Supreme Court enshrined in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Bechan Yadav And 5 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. It is expected of the police not to harass the petitioners till the conclusion of the investigation in any manner whatsoever. However, the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 8. This order was passed in the presence of Sri Anit Kumar Pal, learned counsel for respondent no. 3. September 22, 2025 M. Tarik CRLP No. 20624 of 2025 2 (Abdul Shahid,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad