Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30130-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2526 of 2025 Petitioner :- Gaurav And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhilasha Singh,Kamalesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 02.01.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 2 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 352, 109, 115(2), 118(1) and 351(2) BNS 2023, Police Station- Gunnaur, District- Sambhal. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioners. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that on account of assault made by the petitioners Bal Kishan, Arjun, Dhanvanti, Vimlesh and Hukum Singh have received injuries and they have been medically examined. He has further submitted 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 learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R. and the fact that on account of assault made by the petitioners Bal Kishan, Arjun, Dhanvanti, Vimlesh and Hukum Singh have received injuries and have been medically examined and 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 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 FIR 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 instant writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Subham Digitally signed by :- SUBHAM KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad