Allahabad High Court
CRLP/11999/2025 of RAMAKANT AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME CIVIL SECTT. GOVT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS on 18 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11999 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. In view of proposed order, notice to opposite party no.4 is hereby
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11999 of 2025
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
2
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. In view of proposed order, notice to opposite party no.4 is hereby dispensed with.
3. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 0333 of 2025, under Section 420 IPC, Police Station- Kunda District- Pratapgarh.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the offences as alleged in FIR carry maximum punishment for the term less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest them, which is against the mandate of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.
5. 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 petitioners, 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- (2022) 10 SCC 51.
6. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Priyam Mishra, Dhananjay Yadav, Vinit Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ramakant And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
the petitioners states that his 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 petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station whenever they are required to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, they 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. December 18, 2025 AKK CRLP No. 11999 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench