HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7531 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1.Heard Shri Akshay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Rajnish Kumar Dubey, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Shri Gopal Krishna Dikshit, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama for and on behalf of the opposite party No.5/ informant, which is taken on record. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:- "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) lodged by the opposite party No.5 bearing Case Crime No.159 of 2024, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B I.P.C. dated 01.05.2024 at about 20:36 lodged at Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow Central (Commissionerate Lucknow) annexed herewith as Annexure No.1 against the petitioners. (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent No.1, Respondent No.2, Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4, not to harass and take coercive actions against the petitioners in connection to Case Crime No.159 of 2024, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B I.P.C. dated 01.05.2024 at about 20:36 lodged at Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District-Lucknow Central (Commissionerate Lucknow)." Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akshay Kumar Singh, Arun Singh, Gopal Krishna Dixit, Palak Jawa, Pratyush Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Icici Home Finance Company Ltd. Thru. Authorised Representative Gandarav Gautam And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Affairs And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 3.At the very outset, learned Additional Government Advocate has produced a copy of the instructions letter dated 13.08.2025 provided by one Shri Amit Kumar Singh, Senior Sub-Inspector, Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, District- Lucknow addressing to the Government Advocate, High Court, Lucknow. The same is taken on record. 4.As per the aforesaid instructions, after collecting the credible evidences and material the charge-sheet has been filed against (i) Mukesh Kumar @ Rakesh Yadav, (ii) Raj Kumar S/o Sri Gokharan Prasad, (iii) Ran Vijay Singh @ Rahul Singh S/o Sri Beerbal Singh, (iv) Fayaaj Ahmad S/o Sri Rayeesh Ahmad (v) Jaheer Ahmad S/o Sri Akbar Ali (vi) Ram Kishore Datt Tiwari @ Ram Kishore Tiwari S/o Sri Hanuman Datt Tiwari (vii) Pooja Devi W/o Sri Mukesh Yadav @ Rakesh Yadav. So far as the credible evidences and the culpability of other accused persons are concerned, the investigation against the accused persons, namely, Avinash Singh @ Sinkoo S/o Sri Ramashray Singh, Abhishek Singh @ Nikku S/o Sri Sanjay Singh, Krishna Datt Tiwari @ K.D. S/o Sri Hanuman Datt Tiwari, Maya Devi W/o Mewa Lal and Ram Badhai S/o Sri Shiv Balak is still pending. The aforesaid instructions further reads that since the fraudulent transaction has been done taking loan from ICICI Bank, therefore, for the purpose of investigation the petitioner No.2, who is Territory Portfolio Manager (Territory Credit Manager) ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd., has been called by the Investigating Officer, however, the petitioner No.2 has not appeared before the Investigating Officer to record his statement. So as to arrive on the logical conclusion in the issue in question and to close the investigation, the statement of the petitioner No.2 would be required to be recorded, therefore, notice should be issued to record the statement. 5.Therefore, Sri Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate has stated that there is no incriminating or credible evidences against the petitioner No.1, which is a Bank, and against the petitioner No.2, who is officer of the Bank, regarding culpability in the offence in question. So the prayers prayed in the writ petition are misconceived as on today inasmuch as the petitioners are not having any apprehension of arrest. 6.Learned counsel for the informant has stated that he is a victim and the accused persons have committed fraud and forgery after obtaining loan from the Bank in question. Therefore, the culpability of the Bank Authorities may not be ruled out. CRLP No. 7531 of 2025 2 7.Be that as it may, since the charge-sheet has been filed against eight accused persons and the investigation is pending against five accused persons, so it is expected that the investigation would be conducted and concluded strictly in accordance with law. 8.Since the statement of the petitioner No.2 is to be recorded by the Investigating Officer, therefore, he should appear before the Investigation Officer on 08.09.2025 at 11:00 a.m. sharp to record his statement. Further, when there is no credible or incriminating material against the present petitioners and they are not named in the impugned F.I.R. nor any allegation has been levelled against them in the impugned F.I.R. and only their co- operation in the investigation is required, therefore, the petitioners are having no apprehension of their arrest. It is expected that they shall co- operate in the investigation properly. 9.It is needless to say that if the informant is aggrieved from the charge- sheet, which has already been filed, or a supplementary charge-sheet which may likely to be filed after completion of investigation, he may take appropriate legal recourse before the Competent Authority/ Court of law. 10.In view of the aforesaid terms, the writ petition is disposed of finally. September 2, 2025 Suresh/ CRLP No. 7531 of 2025 3 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench