✦ Allahabad High Court

Shashi Bhushan v. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko & Ors.

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 8990 of 2025RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI2 min read

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 66. Considering the settled law on the subject and the aforesaid stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner states that this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.
  • Para 77. 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 Apex Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

Judgment

Srivastav Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the material placed on record.

2.

In view of the proposed order being passed, notice to respondent No. 4 is hereby dispensed with.

3.

This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari Quashing the present FIR dated 12.6.2025 lodged against the petitioner by the O.P.NO.4, as Case Crime No. 0223/2025, U/Ss, 191(2), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS 2023, P.S. Bhadhokhar, District-Raibareli by O.P.No.4 contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus Commanding the Opp. Parties No.1 to 3 to the effect that they may not initiate any coercive action against the petitioner in pursuance of the FIR. dated 12.6.2025 lodged against the petitioner. "

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offences as alleged in FIR have maximum punishment for the term having less than seven years imprisonment, whereas, the police is trying to arrest him, which is against the mandates of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. 2 CRLP No. 8990 of 2025

5.

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing respondent-State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner, entail sentence of less than seven years, the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are to be strictly followed in terms of judgments rendered by the 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, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021 : (2022) 10 SCC 51.

6.

Considering the settled law on the subject and the aforesaid stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioner states that this petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.

Operative part

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 Apex Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

8.

However, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station on 03.10.2025 at 11.00 AM sharp for the purpose to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, he shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which, the interim protection granted in this order may be withdrawn on an appropriate application being filed by the prosecution or by the complainant. (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) September 24, 2025 Abhishek Gupta ABHISHEK GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Allahabad High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 8990 of 2025). ← Search more judgments