HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9230 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard Sri Harendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record. 2. In view of the proposed order notice to opposite party no. 4 is hereby dispensed with. 3. This petition seeks issuance of direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 17.9.2025 bearing FIR/Case Crime No. 218 of 2025, for the offence under Section 80(2), 85 of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and section 3/4 of D.P. Act registered at Police Station Sadarpur, District Sitapur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that both the petitioners have been falsely implicated as they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. Their relation with their daughter-in-law were cordial and they never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. As a matter of fact the present petitioners had nothing to do with the family affairs of his son or his wife (since deceased). The son of the petitioners has already been arrested. The present case is squarely covered with the dictum of Apex Court in re: Geeta Mehrotra vs. State of U.P., (2012) 10 SCC 741 as the investigation is going on and the present petitioners are ready to cooperate in the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Harendra Singh, Satish Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ram Kumar And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) investigation. 5. Learned AGA has produced the instructions dated 26.9.2025 sent by the Circle Officer, Mehmoodabad, District Sitapur, same is taken on record. 6. Disputing the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners learned Additional Government Advocate Ms. Meera Tripathi has stated that since the investigation is going on, therefore, it may not be said at this stage that there is no culpability of the present petitioners. The complicity of the present petitioners would be determined either at the stage of investigation or during the trial , therefore, on the basis of allegations so levelled in the F.I.R. the impugned F.I.R. may not be quashed. Ms. Tripathi has stated that the petitioners may approach the appropriate court of law for anticipatory bail. 7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties we are of the opinion that in the present case the petitioners should approach the competent court to file anticipatory bail application. 8. Therefore, without entering in to the merits of the issue, we hereby dispose of this petition at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioners to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law within four weeks from today taking all pleas and grounds which are available to him and if such an application is filed the same may be heard and disposed of on its own merits without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. 9. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of in view of the above observations. October 10, 2025 Om CRLP No. 9230 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench