Allahabad High Court
/11504/2025 of SACHIN KUMAR DUBEY AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO. AND OTHERS on 9 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11504 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.4 is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11504 of 2025
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.4 is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for respondents no.1 to 3, and Sri Dhiraj Tiwari holding brief of Sri Kapil Dev Chaubey, learned counsel for respondent no.4.
3. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 588 of 2025, under Section 115(2), 351(3) and 352 of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station- Gosainganj, District- Lucknow South.
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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Parashu Ram Kanaujia, Dilip Kumar, Rajeev Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Hriday Narain Tiwari, Kapil Dev Chaubey Sachin Kumar Dubey And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
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 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 9, 2025 A. Katiyar CRLP No. 11504 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KATIYAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench