Gyan Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Gyan Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the judgments noted above (Arnesh Kumar; Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar; Satendra Kumar Antil; Vimal Kumar); the impugned FIR was expressly not interfered with.

Issue for consideration

Whether, the alleged offences being punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, the police authorities are bound to follow the procedure laid down under Section 35 BNSS and the petitioner cannot be arrested in Case Crime No. 47 of 2025. +1 more

Court's answer

Without interfering with the impugned FIR, the Court held that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar, Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Satendra Kumar Antil, together with the co-ordinate Division Bench judgment in Vimal Kumar, are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.

Ratio / Principle

The instant petition stands disposed of in terms of the judgments noted above; the FIR itself is not interfered with.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Division Bench (Vivek Kumar Birla and Jitendra Kumar Sinha, JJ.), order dated 7.5.2025 in CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 9149 of 2025 (Gyan Singh v. State of U.P. & 3 Others): the petition sought quashing of the FIR dated 23.4.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 47 of 2025 under Sections 352, 351(2), 324(2), 303(2) B.N.S., P.S. Radha Nagar, District Fatehpur, and non-arrest of the petitioner. Counsel submitted that since all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years, the police are bound to follow the procedure under Section 35 BNSS, placing reliance on Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273, Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 and Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2017), Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022) 10 SCC 51 and the co-ordinate Division Bench decision in Vimal Kumar v. State of U.P. (2021 (2) ACR 1147). The Court, without interfering with the FIR, held the Apex Court guidelines equally applicable to the facts of the instant case and disposed of the petition in terms of those judgments.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73175-DB

Court No. - 43

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9149 of 2025

Petitioner :- Gyan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ankit Mishra,Vikas Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.

Heard Sri Ankit Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned A.G.A. for State respondents.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 23.4.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 47 of 2025, under Sections 352, 351(2), 324(2), 303(2) B.N.S., P.S. Radha Nagar, District Fatehpur. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

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 35 of BNSS. 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.

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.

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

Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Lalit Shukla

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