Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24235-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3346 of 2025 Petitioner :- Neetu Navin Rohra (Neetu @ Nasrin In Fir) Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homel Ko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sayyed Farooq Ahmad,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 16.11.2024, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.08 of 2024, for the offence under Sections 121-A, 153-A, 417, 420 I.P.C., and Sections 3, 5(1), 5(2), 5(3), 8(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, registered at Police Station ATS, Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, challenging the aforesaid F.I.R., submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the said case and has no concern with the same. The petitioner is a law abiding citizen and has not committed any crime. Merely because petitioner has been converted from Sanatan to Islam, she has unnecessarily been pressurized. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is Wasiuddin, who had earlier also initiated criminal proceedings against the petitioner and he failed in the same, hence, he has got the present F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner. 4. Opposing the same, learned A.G.A. submits that this is not an F.I.R. lodged by Wasiuddin, but by the S.T.F. against number of persons including present petitioner. The F.I.R. contains details with regard to illegal activities of the petitioner along with other accused involved in the case. Learned A.G.A. further submits that in the present case, number of statements under Sections 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S., 2023, have already been recorded and thereafter Sections 354, 376D of I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)10 and 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act have also been added, and two accused, namely, Mehboob and Navin Rohra have also been arrested. 5. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. A bare perusal of the F.I.R. shows, that this fact is already admitted by the petitioner that she has been converted from Sanatan to Islam on 16.11.2015 at U.A.E., and in support of her case, petitioner has filed a certificate of conversion dated 16.11.2015 as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. As per the said certificate, after conversion, the petitioner has changed her name from 'Neetu' to 'Nasrin'. 7. It is surprising that thereafter also, petitioner never applied to get her name changed in her passport or in other official documents. She continued to represent herself with her old name and it is nowhere reflected that she has now changed her religion and name. Thus, with regard to every action taken thereafter, she has been deceiving persons as has been alleged in the F.I.R. The F.I.R. detailed at length that after conversion also, her passport, aadhar card, PAN card and other documents, stand in her old Hindu name. There are huge amounts running into crores transacted in petitioner's eight bank accounts maintained by her. The F.I.R. also alleges that on the date of conversion i.e. 16.11.2015, as per her passport, she was not in U.A.E. The F.I.R. further details the persons upon whom she has played her undue and illegal influence for conversion. Detailed F.I.R., specifically narrating the incidents, is lodged after a preliminary enquiry is conducted by the authorities. 8. Looking into the contents of F.I.R., this Court is not satisfied that the same got lodged by Wasiuddin due to personal enmity between the parties. The petitioner has nowhere given any explanation with regard to using of old false and incorrect name after conversion, not getting the documents corrected, proving that on the date of conversion, as per her passport, she was present in UAE and the details, purpose and explanation regarding huge bank transactions given in the F.I.R. 9. Thus, in view thereof, this Court at this stage is not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction to quash the F.I.R. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. . [Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.]  [Vivek Chaudhary,J.] Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Sachin Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench