Bholu @ Dinesh v. Shekhar Gangal
Case at a glance
- Bench
- CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of in terms of the
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 35(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. We have gone through the impugned first information report and we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgements are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.
- Para 66. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of in terms of the judgements as noted above. (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) October 17, 2025 RPD RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State respondents.
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 19.09.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 274 of 2025, under Sections 351(2), 352, 126(2), 115(2) BNS, Police Station Shergarh, District -Mathura and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of impugned First Information Report.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that all alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years, therefore the police authorities are bound to follow the procedure laid down under Section 35(3) BNSS (41-A Cr.P.C). It is further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case and they could not be arrested without following the procedure under section 35(3) BNSS (41-A Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgement of Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 156 of 2017 and in Satendra 2 CRLP No. 23562 of 2025 Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCC 51 and co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. & 3 others in 2021 (2) ACR 1147.
We have gone through the impugned first information report and we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgements are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.
Operative part
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of in terms of the judgements as noted above. (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) October 17, 2025 RPD RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of in terms of the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35(3); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.