Amit Kushwaha and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Amit Kushwaha and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with directions: authorities to ensure arrest procedure per Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 guidelines; police not to harass the petitioners till conclusion of investigation; petitioners to cooperate in the investigation. Prayer to quash the F.I.R. declined.

Issue for consideration

Whether the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No. 447 of 2025 under Sections 125(a), 125(b), 281 BNS ought to be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The First Information Report prima facie discloses a cognizable offence, and therefore the prayer to quash the F.I.R. cannot be entertained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court.

Ratio / Principle

No interference with the F.I.R. is warranted by this Court.

Key takeaways

Since all offences mentioned in the present case are punishable with a term up to 7 years, the authorities are directed to ensure the procedure of arrest as per the guidelines of the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273.ratio¶12
The police are expected not to harass the petitioners till the conclusion of the investigation in any manner whatsoever, and the petitioners shall cooperate in the investigation.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Rajeev Misra, J. and Dr. Ajay Kumar-II, J.) disposed of a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition seeking quashing of the First Information Report registered on 25.10.2025 as Case Crime No. 447 of 2025 under Sections 125(a), 125(b), 281 BNS, Police Station Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat. Holding that the F.I.R. prima facie disclosed a cognizable offence, the Court declined to entertain the quashing prayer in view of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, (2021) SCC Online SC 315, observing that no interference was warranted. As learned counsel for the petitioners confined relief to grant of protection under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and all offences alleged were punishable with a term up to 7 years, the Court directed the authorities to ensure the arrest procedure per the Supreme Court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, expected the police not to harass the petitioners till conclusion of investigation, and required the petitioners to cooperate in the investigation.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25651 of 2025

Amit Kushwaha And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others			.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mukesh Kumar Sharma	Pandey,	Praveen Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 47

HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J.

Heard Mr. Praveen Kumar Sharma, the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned A.G.A. representing respondents 1 & 2.

2. Perused the record.

3.Although prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the First Information Report registered on 25.10.2025 lodged as Case Crime No. 447 of 2025, under Sections 125(a), 125(b), 281 BNS, Police Station - Rasoolabad, District- Kanpur Dehat but at the time when the matter is taken up the learned counsel for petitioner confines his relief to grant of protection under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

4.We have perused the the First Information Report which prima facie discloses cognizable offence and, therefore, the prayer made to quash F.I.R. otherwise cannot be entertained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315 .

5.We are of the view that no interference is warranted.

However, considering the fact that all offences, mentioned in the present case, are punishable with a term up to 7 years, therefore, authorities are directed to ensure the procedure of arrest as per the guidelines of Supreme Court enshrined in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 .

It is expected of the Police not to harass the petitioners till the conclusion of the investigation in any manner whatsoever. However, the petitioners shall cooperate in the investigation.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. November 18, 2025 Dhirendra/

(Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)

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