'Acid Attacks Are A Class Apart': Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash FIR; Slams UP Police Over Delayed Injury Reports
Sparsh Upadhyay
10 April 2026 9:11 AM IST

The Allahabad High Court has observed that in matters where acid is being used as a weapon of assault, they are a 'class apart' because of the nature of the weapon of offence
Noting the need for a thorough investigation, a bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR concerning a planned acid attack over a property dispute.
Beyond the specific facts of the case, the High Court also expressed its “extreme displeasure” with the State Police department over not forwarding the injury reports in time before the matters were taken up by the HC.
Issuing a stern warning, the Court stated that it cannot go on summoning Inspectors and Superintendents of Police from different districts merely to ensure the timely supply of injury reports.
The bench made it clear that if remedial action is not taken immediately, it would be compelled to summon the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh or the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of Uttar Pradesh.
The bench was essentially hearing a criminal writ petition filed by one Arun Shukla seeking to quash an FIR registered in Prayagraj district involving Sections 352, 351(3) and 124(1) BNS.
During the hearing, the Court perused the FIR and found that the allegations pertained to a 'dastardly design' to attack the first informant with corrosive acid.
The prosecution alleged that the attack was planned solely because of a property dispute. According to the FIR, one Rohit Sharma acted as the active agent in this design. However, the petitioner (Arun Shukla) and another accused were stated to be behind him.
Noting the extreme gravity of using corrosive acid as a weapon of offence, the bench ruled that the matter requires a thorough investigation. Thus, the bench refused to entertain the petition.
Case title - Arun Shukla vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 200
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 200
