HONEY RAI @ PRAFUL RAI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
CRLP/23456/2026 · 2026-09-27
Mayur Jain Jt Registrar J Listing, Tarun Saxena
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10112 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 10112 (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. - 23456 of 2026 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
1. The present writ petition has been preferred with the following main reliefs:-
"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 11/09/2026, Case Crime No.0259/2026, under Sections 318(4), 317(5), 112(2) B.N.S., P.S. Kotwali, District Jhansi. b) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 not to arrest the petitioner during pendency of the writ petition."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner after some length of arguments on merits made an innocuous prayer that before arresting the petitioner police may be directed to follow the principle laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273.
3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the petition on merits but he has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. R.K. Gupta, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bhriguram Ji, Deo Brat Pandey, Prabhat Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Honey Rai @ Praful Rai .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. Taking into consideration the submissions and prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and no objection by learned A.G.A. on innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, we are inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the authorities concerned 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 (2014) 8 SCC 273 and provision of Section 35(3) of B.N.S.S. September 28, 2026 Atul CRLP No. 23456 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad