Shaukat Ali v. Rahul Kumar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 115(2), 191(2), 329(3), 351(3), 352
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 35
Judgment
Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned A.G.A. representing respondents 1 to 3.
Perused the record.
Although prayer made in this writ petition is to quash the First Information Report registered on 10.09.2025 lodged as Case Crime No. 404 of 2025, under Sections 329(3), 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station - Phoolpur, District- Prayagraj but at the time when the matter is taken up the learned counsel for petitioner confines his relief to grant of protection under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
We have perused the the First Information Report which prima facie discloses cognizable offence and, therefore, the prayer made to quash F.I.R. otherwise cannot be entertained in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315.
We are of the view that no interference is warranted.
However, considering the fact that all offences, mentioned in the present case, are punishable with a term up to 7 years, therefore, authorities are directed to ensure the procedure of arrest as per the guidelines of Supreme Court enshrined in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273.
It is expected of the Police not to harass the petitioners till the conclusion of the investigation in any manner whatsoever. However, the petitioners shall cooperate in the investigation.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. November 18, 2025 Dhirendra/ (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)