Ram Prasad Yadav (In Fir Ram Prasad) & Anr. v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 115(2), 351(2), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ss. 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va)
Judgment
Ram Prasad Yadav (In Fir Ram Prasad) And Another .....Petitioner(s) Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Himanshu Singh Patel : G.A., Kunwar Ajeet Pratap Singh, Mujtaba Kamal Sherwani Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
In view of proposed order, notice to respondent No.4 is hereby dispensed with.
This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari impugned F.I.R. dated 27.10.2025 bearing for quashing F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0273 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015), Police Station- Singahi, District- Kheri.
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.
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 2 CRLP No. 11691 of 2025
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 of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 115(2), 351(2), 352; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — ss. 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va).
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.