Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 159309 (ALL)

MERAJ AHMAD v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/7727/2025 · 2025-09-15

Rajesh Singh Chauhan, S Q H Rizvi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7727 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1.Heard Sri Ajey Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2.In view of the order proposed to be passed, the notice to opposite party No.4 is hereby dispensed with. 3.By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) dated 21.07.2025 bearing FIR/ Case Crime No. 0186 of 2025, under Sections 74, 115(2), 352 & 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station-Risia, District-Bahraich, so far as it relates to the present petitioner, as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. 4.Learned Additional Government Advocate has shown the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. wherein she has levelled allegations against the present petitioner. 5.However, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.2 to the writ petition, which is Whats-app conversation of the prosecutrix with her husband, wherein she stated that she has not implicated the present petitioner, who is father-in-law of the prosecutrix. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajey Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Meraj Ahmad .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 6.Sri Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the aforesaid conversation reveals that under the wrong advice and under the influence of others, she might have recorded statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. 7.However, after arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that the petitioner may be given liberty to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law and direction may be issued to consider and decide the same with expedition. 8.Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, without interfering with the impugned F.I.R. and considering the aforesaid request of learned counsel for the petitioner, we hereby dispose of this writ petition finally at the admission stage by giving liberty to the present petitioner to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law within a period of two weeks from today, and if such application is filed by the petitioner within the aforesaid stipulated time, the same may be heard and decided, strictly in accordance with law, with expedition. September 15, 2025 Suresh/ CRLP No. 7727 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench