Mukhtar Alam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mukhtar Alam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer clause I (quashing of FIR No. 0065 of 2026) dismissed as not pressed; surviving prayers II to IV disposed of in view of Section 35(3), Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law laid down in Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil; petitioner directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 10.03.2026 at 11:00 AM sharp and cooperate till completion of investigation, failing which protection of the order may be withdrawn on application by the prosecution or the complainant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be protected from arrest or coercive process in respect of FIR No. 0065 of 2026, given counsel's contention that the offences alleged carry a maximum punishment of less than seven years' imprisonment and that attempted arrest contravenes the mandates of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

Court's answer

On the investigating agency's stand that the provisions of Section 35(3), Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed as per Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar Antil, the petition (surviving prayers II to IV) is disposed of in view of those provisions and the law laid down by the Apex Court in those cases.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 10.03.2026 at 11:00 AM sharp and to cooperate in the investigation.

Key takeaways

The petitioner must continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which the protection of this order may be withdrawn on an application moved by the prosecution or the complainant.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 10; Rajnish Kumar and Zafeer Ahmad, JJ.), Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 895 of 2026, disposed of on 16 February 2026. Petitioner Mukhtar Alam had sought inter alia quashing of F.I.R. No. 0065 of 2026, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, district Sultanpur, lodged by opposite party no.4 on 25.1.2026 under Sections 351(3), 78 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act. At the outset, the prayer to quash the FIR (clause I) was dismissed as not pressed. On counsel's submission that the offences alleged carry maximum punishment of less than seven years and that the attempt to arrest contravened the mandates of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, the learned A.G.A., on behalf of the investigating agency, stated that the provisions of Section 35(3), Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed in terms of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51. Accepting that stand, the Court disposed of the surviving prayers (II to IV) in view of Section 35(3) BNSS, 2023 and the said Apex Court rulings, directing the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer on 10.03.2026 at 11:00 AM sharp, to continue cooperating in the investigation till its completion, and making the protection of the order withdrawable, on application by the prosecution or the complainant, if he failed to do so.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 895 of 2026

Mukhtar Alam

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. And Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Mohammad Ashraf
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A., Sudhakar Mishra

Court No. - 10

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

1. Heard Shri Mohammad Ashraf, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Sudhakar Mishra, learned Counsel for the opposite party no.4 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. At the outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press prayer clause no.I and the same may be dismissed as not pressed, to which learned A.G.A. has no objection.

3. In view of above, the present writ petition is dismissed as not pressed in respect of prayer clause no.I i.e. to quash the impugned F.I.R. No. 0065 of 2026, under Sections 351 (3), 78, 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 5 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, police station Kotwali Nagar, district Sultanpur. Now, the present writ petition survives only in respect of prayer clause nos.II, III and IV, which are reproduced as under :-

"ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties particularly opp. parties not to arrest or adopt any coercive process, against the petitioners, in respect of the first information report no.0065/2026 dated 25.1.2026 lodged by the opposite party no.4, under section-351(3), 78, 3 (5) BNS and sections Sections 3 and 5 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, police station Kotwali Nagar, district Sultanpur, lodged by the opposite party no.4, in the interest of justice.

iv) Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit

CRLP No. 895 of 2026

2

and proper under the circumstances of the case, may kindly passed in favour of petitioner, in the interest of justice."

4. 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 them, which is against the mandates of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

5. Learned A.G.A. appearing for 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.

6 . 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.

7. 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).

8. However, it is directed that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 10.03.2026 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.

February 16, 2026 Ajit

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

Digitally signed by :- AJIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench