Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2498 of 2025 Petitioner :- Arvind Harijan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Monis,Rahul Saroj Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an amendment application today in Court, which is taken on record. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in the instant case, the victim is a minor girl and consequently offence under the POCSO Act has also been added. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 28.11.2024 giving rise to Case Crime No. 132 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) BNS and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Sigramau, District- Jaunpur. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioner. 6. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of is clearly disclosed against the petitioner 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. 7. 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 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 petitioner and noting the submissions made by learned AGA, we are of the opinion that impugned first information report can not be quashed. 8. The prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is, therefore, refused. 9. However, in case, the petitioner files an application for regular bail before the appropriate Court, his bail application be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 10. 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