1. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Alok Kumar Singh alongwith Sri Abhishek Tripathi, Sri Alok Kumar Singh, Sri Namit Srivastava, Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Ms Richa Srivastav, Sri Sarvjeet Kumar, Sri Vikrant Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ratan Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 15.06.2024 registered as Case Crime No.223 of 2024, under Sections-420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Civil Lines, District-Prayagraj, and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned first information report.

3. Pursuant to the earlier orders of this court, learned counsel appearing for the informant states that their dues have been settled and few claims have been promised to be settled by the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the dues of the students have been settled as claimed by them and, in case, if any other dues are left they shall also be settled within the shortest possible period.

5. Learned counsel for the informant is present and he agreed to the same.

6. The submission is 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) of BNSS. The petitioners have been wrongly implicated and could not be arrested. Reliance has been placed 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 Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCC 51 and coordinate Division Bench of this Court in Vimal Kumar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others in 2021 (2) ACR 1147.

7. We have gone through the impugned first report and we are of the opinion that the guidelines framed by the Apex Court in the above noted judgement are equally applicable to the facts of the instant case.

8. Accordingly, the instant petition also stands disposed of in terms of the judgements as noted above. Ref: Criminal Misc. Modification Application No.7 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Release Application No.20 of 2024

9. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants/petitioners that they have surrendered their passports in pursuance of the order dated 23.09.2024 of this court which may be released so that the petitioners can go out of the country for the treatment and business purposes. It is also requested by learned counsel for the petitioners that in pursuance of the letter dated 19.06.2024 of Investigating Officer, account of the petitioners' company as well as personal account of the Director of the FIITJEE have been freezed and that may also be un-freezed so that the petitioners could use the same for running the business of their company (FIITJEE).

10. Considering the fact that petitioners have settled most of the dispute with claimant-students and learned counsel for the informant also accepted this fact, let the passports of petitioner no.1-Dinesh Kumar Goel, petitioner no.2-Rajeev Babbar and petitioner no.3-Manish Anand, be released.

11. It is further directed that the personal account of the petitioners as well as account of the petitioners' company (FIITJEE) shall also be un-freezed, subject to the condition that petitioners' company (FIITJEE) will maintain a balance of Rs.1 crore as security in the account of the company (FIITJEE), till the conclusion of the investigation so as to settle the dispute regarding payment of remaining students, if requires.

12. Accordingly, both the applications are disposed of.