HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7951 of 2025 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajai Kumar, holding brief of Sri Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party No.4. 2. This petition has been filed seeking a direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned FIR dated 08.08.2025 registered as Case Crime No.0143 of 2025, under Sections 351(3), 352, 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4), 319(2) of B.N.S. at Police Station Gomti Nagar Extension, District Lucknow. 3. This Court had passed the following order on 04.09.2025:- "1. Heard Sri Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Anil Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 08.08.2025, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0143/2025, under Sections 351(3), 352, 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4), 319(2) ?.N.S., at Police Station Gomti Nagar Extension, District Lucknow, contained as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition with respect to the petitioners; Issue a writ, order or Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pawan Kumar Pandey, Sharad Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Anil Kumar Tripathi Pravesh Kumar Yadav And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding the opposite parties not to arrest the Petitioners in pursuance of the impugned First Information Report dated 08.08.2025, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0143/2025, under Sections 351(3), 352, 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4), 319(2) B.N.S., at Police Station Gomti Nagar Extension, District Lucknow, contained as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition with respect to the petitioners." 3. On 03.09.2025, following order was passed:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioners is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant/respondent no.4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are the practising lawyers, the gift deed in question was prepared and examined by them and on the basis of documents produced before them, they identified Santosh Kumar Maurya & Sunita Maurya. He further submits that petitioners were not aware about the dispute in between complainant/respondent no.4 and Santosh Kumar Maurya and they do not have any concern with the pending case in between them for cancellation of gift deed related to the property in question. He also submits that petitioners are ready to cooperate in the investigation and some time may be granted for filing specific affidavit that petitioners are not appearing in any case of Santosh Kumar Maurya or Sunita Maurya. 4. Put up tomorrow, i.e., on 4.9.2025 at 2:30 P.M. 5. In the meantime, petitioners may file affidavit explaining this fact that they are not appearing in any case of Santosh Kumar Maurya or Sunita Maurya." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that only the document was drafted by one of the petitioners and on the basis of relevant documents produced by Santosh Kumar Maurya and Poonam Maurya, they were identified, however, the petitioners have no concern in regard to the same. He further submits that in pursuance of earlier order dated CRLP No. 7951 of 2025 2 03.09.2025, in the supplementary affidavit, it is mentioned by the petitioners that they have never been engaged by Santosh Kumar Maurya, Sunita Maurya and Poonam Maurya in any case, hence, indulgence of this court is required and the F.I.R. in relation to the petitioners may be set aside. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayers of the petitioners. However, they do not dispute the fact that the deed in question was drafted by one of the petitioners and the aforesaid persons have been identified. 6. Considering the contents of the F.I.R. and the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the view that the matter requires consideration. 7. List this case on 06.10.2025. 8. Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioners subject to cooperation in the investigation. " 4. Connected Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.8154 of 2025 filed by the main accused, Santosh Kumar Maurya and Sunita Maurya has been dismissed as not pressed with liberty to avail remedy of anticipatory bail / bail on behalf of Santosh Kumar Maurya. Thereafter, the petition survived only on behalf of Sunita Maurya, which has been disposed of after considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, providing therein that the petitioner shall not be arrested till filing of the police report. 5. The present petition has been filed by the marginal witnesses of the gift deed. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are only marginal witnesses and they have only identified the respondent No.4 in the gift deed without knowing about the dispute, which was going on between the parties, thus, they are also entitled for the same benefit, which has been granted to Ms. Sunita Maurya. 6. Learned counsel for the opposite parties though opposed the prayer but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. CRLP No. 7951 of 2025 3 7. In view of above, this petition is disposed of providing that the petitioners shall not be arrested in connection with the impugned FIR till submission of the police report subject to their co-operation in the investigation. September 26, 2025 Saurabh CRLP No. 7951 of 2025 4 (Rajeev Singh,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench