Writ petition seeking quashing of FIR No.126/2025 lodged by a Sub-Inspector under BNS sections after a village quarrel, alleging retaliatory police action. Court sought counter affidavit, granted interim protection from arrest conditioned on cooperation in investigation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7695 of 2025
Anil Gautam @ Anil Kumar And 5 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Paritosh Shukla, Sukh Deo Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 10
HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers :-
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 24/06/2025 lodged by the respondent no.4 bearing FIR No.126/2025, under Sections 191(2), 121, 132, 352, 351(3), 127(2), 189 BNS and 7 CLA Act, Police Station Karaundi Kala, District Sultanpur.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents authorities not to arrest the petitioners on the basis of the impugned FIR dated 24/06/2025 lodged by the respondent no.4 bearing FIR No.126/2025, under Sections 191(2), 121, 132, 352, 351(3), 127(2), 189 BNS and 7 CLA Act, Police Station Karaundi Kala, District Sultanpur.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a quarrel took place between the petitioners and co-villagers and a complaint was reported to the police station concerned. Thereafter, preventive action was taken by the police personnel and petitioner no.1 was also beaten by police personnel on the behest of rivals and he received injuries in his ear. After release, the petitioner no.1 filed a complaint case against the police personnel, which was registered and an order was passed for recording the statements of the complainant as well
CRLP No. 7695 of 2025
2
as witnesses. As a result, the police officials of the concerned police station were annoyed and on the basis of concocted facts, the impugned F.I.R. was lodged by the respondent no.4, S.I. Santosh Kumar Shukla, on 24.06.2025, with the averment that while he started visiting his beat for maintaining law and order and also in relation to the investigation of cases, it came into his knowledge that one day ago on 23.06.2025 at about 13:00 hours, some photos and videos were viraled, in which it was found that the accused persons had gathered at a place along with 20 to 25 persons and started casting aspersions to a particular community and also raising slogans against the government as well as the police, as a result of which law and order was disturbed.
4. He further submitted that it is highly improbable that the alleged incident, in which around 30 persons were involved, took place on 23.06.2025, but this fact came into the knowledge of the police personnel, who is posted in the police station having jurisdiction over the area of incident, only on 24.06.2025. His next submission is that the petitioners are ready to cooperate in the investigation. He has also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426 , and requested for kind indulgence of this Court.
5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners and submitted that prima facie offence is made out against the petitioners. However, he does not dispute the fact as mentioned in F.I.R. that the alleged incident took place on 23.06.2025, which admittedly came to the notice of the informant, who is the Sub-Inspector of the concerned police station, on 24.06.2025.
6. Considering facts and circumstances of the case and as the incident is of dated 23.06.2025 but the informant, who is the SubInspector, posted in the police station having jurisdiction over the area, has stated that the incident came to his knowledge on the next date, the matter requires consideration.
7. Let counter affidavit be filed within two weeks.
8. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within a week thereafter.
CRLP No. 7695 of 2025
3
9. List thereafter.
10. Till the next date of listing, the petitioners shall not be arrested in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.
11. The petitioners are also directed to cooperate in the investigation; failing which, the interim order shall be vacated.
(Rajeev Singh,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.)
August 26, 2025 A.Dewal
Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether FIR No.126/2025 against the petitioners should be quashed as concocted and procedurally improper.
Whether the petitioners should be protected from arrest pending investigation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan LalRelied on¶4
1992 SCC(Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Anil Gautam @ Anil Kumar And 5 Others
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.
S.I. Santosh Kumar Shukla
Rajnish Kumar
Rajeev Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
