MOHIT PANDEY AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO AND 3 OTHERS
CRLP/5539/2025 · 2025-06-30
Alok Mathur, Shree Prakash Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 147776 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 147776 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36801-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5539 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohit Pandey And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Umesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State.
2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing the first information report lodged in case crime No.212/2025 under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 109 (1), 118 (1), 352 and 351 (3) of BNSS relating to police station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Ayodhya. It has been submitted that as per the version of teh complainant he was attacked by three to four persons including the petitioner on the date of the in incident i.e. on 31.3.2025 at 11 PM. It has been submitted that the police did not lodge the said incident in which the complainant was seriously assaulted by hockey sticks and knives with intention to kill him. The first information report was lodged only after intervention of the court under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. on 2.5.2025.We have also perused the first information report and find that there are 12 injuries sustained by the injured and there is one lacerated wound which is indicated at serial No.7. In light of the above, it cannot be said that the first information report is false and no offence is made out.
3. Case of the petitioner is that no case under Section 307 IPC is made out. Considering the aforesaid facts it cannot be denied that as per the injury report the complainant has received many injuries. Even if the argument of the petitioner is accepted it cannot be denied that Sections 323 and 325 IPC may be involved and, hence it cannot said that no offence is made out. For the reasons aforesaid no interference is called for.
4. The petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. (Shree Prakash Singh, J.) (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 30.6.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench