HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8147 of 2025 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Sumit Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following prayers :- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari tehreby quashing First Information Report dated 08.08.2025, vide case crime no.0262 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 333, 191(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the opposite party no.3 not to arrest and harass the petitioner in pursuance of First Information Report dated 08.08.2025, vide case crime no.0262 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 333, 191(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich as contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the impugned F.I.R. on the basis of concocted story as a civil suit was filed by the petitioner against respondent no. 4, i.e., the complainant and others. He further submits that no injury was caused by the petitioner. Thus, the submission is that the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed, as the civil dispute is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sumit Chauhan, Ashutosh Srivastava, Pratibha Maurya Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Yusuf Ali @ Daddan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) being attempted to be converted into a criminal case. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He has produced undated written instructions, received on 29.08.2025, sent by Ramnajar Yadav, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich, which are taken on record. He submits that simple injuries were received by the victim; therefore, it cannot be said that the incident did not occur. He also submits that there is criminal history of 26 cases against the petitioner, which has not been disclosed in the writ petition; rather, it has been stated that there is no criminal history of the petitioner. 5. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the impugned F.I.R. as well as the instructions placed by the learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the commission of the offence cannot be ruled out and any plea or material of the petitioner cannot be examined by this Court at this stage. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. September 2, 2025 A.Dewal CRLP No. 8147 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench