CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11962 of 2025 Arnav Gupta v. State of Bihar - (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil & Anr.
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. 318(4), 319(2)
- Information Technology Act, 2000 s. 66D
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel 2 CRLP No. 11962 of 2025 for the petitioner states that his 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 the Apex Court in re; Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra).
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
In view of proposed order, notice to respondent No.3 is hereby dispensed with.
This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing impugned F.I.R. dated 04.12.2025 bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.0462 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 66D of I.T. Act, Police Station- Unchachar, District- Raebareli.
Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 him, 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 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 SCC 51.
Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel 2 CRLP No. 11962 of 2025 for the petitioner states that his petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts.
Operative part
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).
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, he 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. December 17, 2025 S. Shivhare (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) SHASHANK SHIVHARE 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 of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 318(4), 319(2); Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 66D.
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.