Anita Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Anita Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of without quashing the FIR, subject to the petitioner(s) appearing before the Investigating Officer whenever required and cooperating in the investigation till completion; failure would permit withdrawal of the protection of the order on application by the prosecution or the complainant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of FIR/Case Crime No. 0442 of 2025 (Sections 3 & 7, Essential Commodities Act, 1955) should be granted, given that the alleged offences carry maximum punishment of less than seven years' imprisonment and any arrest must follow the mandate of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (Section 35(3)) as laid down in Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil.

Court's answer

The petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner(s) shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station whenever required to cooperate in the investigation, and shall continue to cooperate till its completion, failing which the protection of this order may be withdrawn on application being moved by the prosecution or the complainant.

Key takeaways

Notice to opposite party no. 4 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order.¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11730 of 2025 (Abdul Moin and Mrs. Babita Rani, JJ.), decided December 12, 2025 — Petition by Anita seeking direction in the nature of certiorari to quash FIR/Case Crime No. 0442 of 2025, under Sections 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Police Station Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur, disposed of in view of Section 35(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar ((2014) 8 SCC 273) and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI ((2022) 10 SCC 51). Learned A.G.A. for the State had stated that because the alleged offence entails sentence of less than seven years, the provisions of Section 35(3) BNSS, 2023 shall be strictly followed. Petitioner(s) directed to appear before the Investigating Officer whenever required and to cooperate till completion of investigation, failing which protection of the order may be withdrawn on application moved by the prosecution or the complainant. Notice to opposite party no. 4 dispensed with.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11730 of 2025

Anita

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mukul Kumar Sharma, Mohammad
	Saem Shiraz, Mohit Sharma
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 11

HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

In view of proposed order, notice to opposite party no.4 is hereby dispensed with.

This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 0442 of 2025, under Sections 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Police Station- Rampur Mathura, District- Sitapur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in FIR carry maximum punishment for the term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest them, which is against the mandate of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

Learned A.G.A. appearing for respondents-State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners, entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed in terms of judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in re; Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another - (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and another- (2022) 10

CRLP No. 11730 of 2025

2

SCC 51.

Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioners states that his petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law as laid down by the Apex Court in re; Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra) .

However, it is directed that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station whenever they are required to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, they shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which, protection of this order may be withdrawn on the application being moved by the prosecution or the complainant.

(Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.)

December 12, 2025

Pachhere/-

Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench