SAIR UDDIN AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
CRLP/22441/2026 · 2026-09-16
Mayur Jain Jt Registrar J Listing, Tarun Saxena
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7978 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7978 (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. - 22441 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 12.08.2026 in Case Crime No.346 of 2026, under Sections 74, 191(2), 115(2) of BNS, Police Station Nawabganj, District Allahabad 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 counsel for respondent no. 3 and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the petition on merits but they have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Murtuza Ali, learned counsel for respondent no. 3 and 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 counsel for respondent no. 3 and learned A.G.A. on innocuous prayer made by Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Zaid Arshad Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Imran Ali, Murtuza Ali Sair Uddin And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
learned counsel for the petitioners, we are 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. September 17, 2026 SK Srivastava CRLP No. 22441 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad