HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21757 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 has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 03.09.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0574 of 2025, under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Ramgarhtal, District Gorakhpur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is wholly innocent and he has been in consensual relations with the victim who is also a married lady and as such no cognizable offence whatsoever is disclosed against the petitioner and the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the said prayer and submitted that the petitioner himself is a married person and by deception he has made consensual relations with the victim by assuring her that he will marry with her and on the false pretext of marriage has been regularly squeezing money out of her. 5. Learned A.G.A. has further submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioner, therefore, the impugned first information report can not be quashed in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arvind Prabodh Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shamshad Alam @ Rakesh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) (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. 6. Having considered the rival submission made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in the first information report and the relevant law cited by learned A.G.A. and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner and noting the submissions made by the learned A.G.A., we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report can not be quashed. 7. The prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is therefore refused. 8. However in case, the petitioner moves an application for anticipatory bail/ regular bail before the appropriate court, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. October 8, 2025 SA CRLP No. 21757 of 2025 2 (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SALMAN ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad