HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21745 of 2025 Court No. - 45 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE DEVENDRA SINGH-I, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 3.9.2025, giving rise to Case Crime No. 388 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 62, 352 B.N.S., Police Station- Mariyahun, District- Jaunpur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has produced the case diary, wherein the statement of the victim has been recorded and even the allegations of committing the offence of rape has been alleged against the petitioner and as such the offence under section 64(1) BNS and 3/4 of POCSO Act. has also been added against the petitioner and from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of, is clearly disclosed against the petitioner and, as such, the first information report cannot be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and in a recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dinesh Kumar Patel Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Suraj Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) the allegations of committing the offence of rape has been alleged against the petitioner and as such offences under section 64(1) BNS and 3/4 of POCSO Act. has also been added against the petitioner and in view of the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. and the relevant law cited by learned A.G.A. for the State and the fact that impugned F.I.R. prima facie discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner and noting the submissions made by learned AGA, we are of the opinion that impugned first information report can not be quashed. 6. The prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is, therefore, refused. 7. However, in case, the petitioner files an application for anticipatory/ regular bail before the appropriate Court, his bail application be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 8. With these observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. October 8, 2025 R CRLP No. 21745 of 2025 2 (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM ASARE MORYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad