Allahabad High Court
/10947/2025 of VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAV Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND OTHERS on 19 November 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10947 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitionersand Sri G.D.Bhatt, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 1 to 3. 2. In view of
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10947 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
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. Heard learned counsel for the petitionersand Sri G.D.Bhatt, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 1 to 3.
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 First Information Report dated 05.08.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 354 of 2025 under Sections 419 & 420 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station- Bachhrawan District- Raebareli, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in impugned 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 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- (2022) 10 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Raj, Hanumant Lal Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Vivek Kumar Srivastav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
SCC 51.
6. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner 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 petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station whenever he is 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.
9. Learned AGA also states that the petitioner shall not be harassed unnecessarily provided he cooperates in the investigation. November 19, 2025 Pachhere/- CRLP No. 10947 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench