Disposed

Sonbeer Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2025CRLP/1045/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought quashing of an FIR under BNS provisions and protection from arrest, contending all alleged offences carry punishment up to seven years so Section 41-A Cr.P.C. safeguards apply. The High Court declined to interfere with the FIR but disposed of the petition in terms of Arnesh Kumar and allied Apex Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

FIR not quashed; petition disposed in terms of Arnesh Kumar/Satendra Kumar Antil guidelines governing arrest procedure.

Sonbeer Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9399-DB

¶2

Court No. - 43

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1045 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Sonbeer Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kuamr Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ajay Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for State respondents.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 20.12.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 917 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 324(4), 318(4), 316(4) of B.N.S., P.S. Banna Devi, District Aligarh. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

¶8

Although prayer for quashing of FIR has been made but without insisting on the same only submission is that all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years, therefore the police authorities are bound to follow the procedure laid down under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been wrongly implicated and could not be arrested. Reliance has been placed on the judgement of Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017, Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2017, Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 and co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 others in 2021 (2) ACR 1147.

¶9

We have gone through the impugned first information report and without interfering in the same, we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgement are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.

¶10

Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in terms of the judgments noted above.

¶11

Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Lalit Shukla

¶12

Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonbeer Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonbeer Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Kumar Gupta Alias Ramji vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Indrajit and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Shahana Detainu and Another vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sonu @ Mosin vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kunal Alias Kunal Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others