SHIVANKIT AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
CRLP/21607/2026 · 2026-09-22
Padam Narain Mishra, Salil Kumar Rai
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8719 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8719 (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. - 21607 of 2026 Court No. - 45 HON'BLE SALIL KUMAR RAI, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Dilip Kumar Pal, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 4 is taken on record. Heard the counsel for the petitioners, the A.G.A. for the State and Shri Dilip Kumar Pal, the counsel for the respondent no. 4. The present petition has been filed challenging the First Information Report dated 07.08.2026 in Case Crime No. 0516 of 2026, under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 75(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 at Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar. We have perused the FIR, which prima facie discloses cognizable offences against the petitioners and therefore, the prayer made to quash the FIR cannot be entertained in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and as such, we are of the view that no interference is warranted. However, considering the fact that all the offences, complained of in the impugned FIR, are punishable with a term up to seven years, therefore, in case of effecting the arrest of the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned FIR, it is directed that the respondents/ authorities shall ensure that the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shivankit And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s)
specific provisions contained in Section 41(1)(b) and Section 41-A of CrPC/Section 35(3) to 35(7) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 as well as the directions issued in judgement and order dated 28.01.2021 of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17732 of 2020 (Vimal Kumar and 3 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) reported in 2021 (2) ACR 1147, be strictly complied with. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.
September 23, 2026 Vipasha CRLP No. 21607 of 2026 2 (Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Salil Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIPASHA MUKHERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad