Disposed¶10

Usha and 3 Others v. State of Up and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 May 2025CRLP/9154/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused; arrest safeguards. FIR under Sections 131, 324(4), 351(3) BNS, PS Kalwari, District Basti; offences punishable up to seven years; Section 35 BNSS arrest procedure; Arnesh Kumar guidelines applied; Satendra Kumar Antil applied; Vimal Kumar (DB Allahabad HC) applied; petition disposed of in terms of cited judgments; no arrest protection order beyond guidelines; Allahabad High Court, 7.5.2025, Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla, J. and Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in terms of the judgments noted above (Arnesh Kumar, Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar, Satendra Kumar Antil, and Vimal Kumar); the impugned FIR was not quashed or interfered with. ¶10

Usha and 3 Others vs State of Up and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73266-DB

¶2

Court No. - 43

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9154 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Usha And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saksham Srivastava,Yasharth Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard Sri Yasharth Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.

¶7

The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 7.4.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 0062 of 2025, under Sections 131, 324(4), 351(3) BNS, PS Kalwari, District Basti, and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.

¶8

Although the 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 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 and in 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 judgements as noted above.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Abhishek

¶12

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Usha and 3 Others v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usha and 3 Others v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Baks Singh and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

State of Up vs Akhilesh Yadav S/O Ram Narayan Yadav

Akil Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gyan Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Husain Uddin Hashim vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Evran Singh and 4 Others vs State of U.P, and 2 Others