Disposed¶20

Sonu Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2026CRLP/1259/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court interim order dated 13.02.2026 in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 1259 of 2026 (Sonu Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 others): no-arrest protection till 09.03.2026 in FIR dated 20.12.2025, Case Crime No.601 of 2025, Sections 87, 137(2) BNS, P.S. Bithri Chainpur, District Bareilly; victim's statement under section 183 BNSS and father's no-objection to quashing noted; quashing of FIR kept open; supplementary counter affidavit within one week.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection from arrest: till the next date (09.03.2026), the petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance of the impugned FIR dated 20.12.2025 (Case Crime No.601 of 2025); one week's time granted to respondent no.3 to file a supplementary counter affidavit; matter to be put up as fresh on 09.03.2026. ¶20

Sonu Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned first information report qua the petitioner is liable to be quashed.

¶12

Court's answer

Interim direction: till the next date of listing (09.03.2026), the petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance of the impugned FIR dated 20.12.2025 arising out of Case Crime No.601 of 2025. The question of quashing the FIR was not decided at this stage.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 45; Rajiv Gupta and Achal Sachdev, JJ.) — Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 1259 of 2026, Sonu Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 others (order dated February 13, 2026): Writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR dated 20.12.2025 arising out of Case Crime No.601 of 2025 under Sections 87, 137(2) of BNS, Police Station Bithri Chainpur, District Bareilly. Petitioner contended that prima facie no offence was disclosed against him. Per contra, the learned AGA produced the case diary containing the victim's statement recorded under section 183 of BNSS, wherein she stated she had gone with the petitioner on 20.12.2025 out of her own free will and consent and no offence of rape was committed against her. Respondent no.3 (father) stated in his short counter affidavit that his minor daughter was not enticed away but had gone to Moradabad on her own sweet will and volition, and that he had no objection if the impugned FIR was quashed. Short counter affidavit taken on record; one week granted to file a supplementary counter affidavit. Interim order: till the next date the petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance of the impugned FIR; matter put up as fresh on 09.03.2026. The question of quashing remains open.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1259 of 2026

Sonu Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others

¶6

.....Respondent(s)

¶7

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 45

¶9

HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J.

¶10

Sri Raj Kumar Singh, Advocate, has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no.3 alongwith his vakalatnama, today in Court, which is taken on record.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.3 and perused the record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has next submitted that from the allegations made in the impugned first information report and the material collected during the course of the investigation, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioner and as such, the impugned first information report qua the petitioner is liable to be quashed.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has placed before us copy of the case diary containing the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 of BNSS, wherein she has categorically stated that she out of her own free will and consent had gone with the petitioner on 20.12.2025 and no offence of rape has been committed against her and now she has returned back and staying with her

¶14

CRLP No. 1259 of 2026

¶15

¶16

father.

¶17

Learned counsel for respondent no.3 in paragraph no.2 of the short counter affidavit has stated that the daughter of respondent no.3, who is a minor girl, was not enticed away by the petitioner, rather she had gone to Moradabad on her own sweet will and volition, feeling annoyed with her family members.

¶18

Learned counsel for respondent no.3 has further stated in paragraph no.2 of the short counter affidavit that the respondent no.3 has no objection, if the impugned FIR is quashed by this Court. However, he prays for and is granted one week's time to file a supplementary counter affidavit.

¶19

Put up as fresh on 09.03.2026.

¶20

Till then, the petitioner shall not be arrested in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R. dated 20.12.2025 arising out of Case Crime No.601 of 2025, under Sections 87, 137(2) of BNS, Police Station Bithri Chainpur, District Bareilly.

¶21

February 13, 2026 VKG

¶22

(Achal Sachdev,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.)

¶23

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

Sonu Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Singh v. State of U.P. 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Girija Devi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P.

Uma Chand @ Umachand Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Pal vs Smt. Husana and 2 Other

Harsh Baliyan vs State of U.P. and Another

Akshay Singh Rajawat vs State of U.P. and Another