MOHD. IDRISH AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
CRLP/23660/2026 · 2026-10-07
Mayur Jain Jt Registrar J Listing, Tarun Saxena
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13797 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 13797 (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. - 23660 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 prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 05.09.2026 in Case Crime No.402 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 191(2), 324(4), 352 of BNS and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, Police Station Bhongaon, District Mainpuri and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners after some length of arguments on merits made an innocuous prayer that before arresting the petitioners 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 State vehemently opposed the petition on merits but he has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.
5. Taking into consideration the submissions and prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners and no objection by learned A.G.A. on innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, we are Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anurag Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Mohd. Idrish And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
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. October 8, 2026 SK Srivastava CRLP No. 23660 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad