HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10393 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the FIR dated 14.07.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 408 of 2025, under Sections 333, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 309(6) of BNS, Police Station Ganga Ghat, District Unnao. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie no offence whatsoever is disclosed against the petitioners and as such, the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has submitted that on account of assault made by the petitioners, respondent no.4 and her husband are said to have received injuries and have been medically examined and a sum of Rs.10,000/- is alleged to have also been looted. 5. Learned AGA for the State has further submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioners, therefore, the impugned first information report can not be quashed in view of law laid down Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Jayveer Rajput Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Rama Pasi @ Ramu And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko U.P. And Others .....Respondent(s) by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases 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. 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that on account of assault made by the petitioners, respondent no.4 and her husband are said to have received injuries and have been medically examined and a sum of Rs.10,000/- is alleged to have also been looted and keeping in view the allegations made in the first information report and the relevant law cited by learned AGA for the State and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence against the petitioners, we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report can not be quashed, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is refused. 7. However in case, the petitioners file an application for anticipatory/regular bail before the appropriate court, their bail application shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of. November 4, 2025 Nadim CRLP No. 10393 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- NADIM ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench