HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22488 of 2025 Court No. - 49 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. HON'BLE MRS. GARIMA PRASHAD, J. 1. Heard counsel for the petitioners, Sri Suchit Tandon, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned F.I.R. dated 27.8.2025 in Case Crime No.0183 of 2025, under Sections 351(3), 352, 115(2), 191(2), 135, 131, 308(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Karimuddinpur, District- Ghazipur. 3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioners. 4. Per contra, learned AGA submits that specific allegation of extortion has been levelled against the petitioners. He further submits that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of is clearly disclosed against the petitioners 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 counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that allegation of extortion has been levelled against the petitioners and the relevant law cited by learned A.G.A. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jawahar Lal Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Pratap Narayan Mishra And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) for the State and the fact that impugned F.I.R. prima facie discloses cognizable offence against the petitioners 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 F.I.R. is, therefore, refused. 7. However, in case, the petitioners file an application for anticipatory/ regular bail before the appropriate Court, their bail application be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 8. With these observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. October 6, 2025 S.S. CRLP No. 22488 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Garima Prashad,J.) (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad