Jitendra Tharu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Oct 2025CRLP/9185/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court disposes petition against FIR for offences punishable with less than seven years; State undertakes to follow Section 35(3) BNSS and Arnesh Kumar guidelines; petitioner directed to cooperate with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with direction to petitioner to appear before Investigating Officer on 27.10.2025 at 11:00 AM and cooperate in investigation; protection from arrest conditional on cooperation. ¶18-19

Jitendra Tharu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9185 of 2025

Jitendra Tharu

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others

¶7

	.....Resp	ondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Devendra Kumar, Jai Prakash, Kumar Tripathi	Virendra
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 10

¶9

HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.

¶10

Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

In view of proposed order, notice to opposite party no.4 is hereby dispensed with.

¶12

This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0277/2025, under Sections 419, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Hasanganj, District Unnao.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in FIR have maximum punishment for the term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest him, which is against the mandates of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. appearing for respondents-State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner, entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed in terms of judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in re; Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 .

¶15

CRLP No. 9185 of 2025

¶16

¶17

Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner states that let this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.

¶18

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law as laid down by the Apex Court in re; Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra) .

¶19

However, It is directed that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 27.10.2025 at 11:00 AM sharp for the purpose to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, he shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which, protection of this order may be withdrawn on the application being moved by the prosecution or the complainant.

¶20

(Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.)

¶21

October 7, 2025

¶22

Akanksha Sri/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jitendra Tharu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Tharu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 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

Gangaram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Others

Anita and Another vs State of U.P. thru Principal Secretary, Home and 3 others

Muskan Srivastava and Anothers Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Arjun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Kripal and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Others

Prakshi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others