HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9864 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J. 1. Heard Sri Sudhaker Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State- opposite parties No.1 to 3. However, Sri Anurag Dwivedi, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.4/ complainant and filed Vakalatnama on his behalf. The same is taken on record. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have assailed the impugned FIR dated 13.09.2025 bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0452 of 2025, under Sections 351(3), 352, 115(2) & 191 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Tambaur, District- Sitapur, which is contained as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, so far as it relates to the present petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that this is the case wherein the F.I.R. has been lodged by both the sides and both sides have received injuries. The F.I.R. lodged from the side of the present petitioners is bearing F.I.R./ Case Crime No.0450 of 2025, under Sections 191(2) 191(3), 190, 115(2), 110 & 109(1) of B.N.S., Police Station-Tambaur, District-Sitapur whereas the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on the same date. 4. Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned Additional Government Advocate has produced a copy of the instructions letter dated 27.10.2025 sent by Sri Sheetala Prasad, Sub-Inspector, Police Station-Tambaur, District-Sitapur addressing to the learned Government Advocate, High Court, Lucknow and as per the aforesaid instructions, during the course of investigation, Section 109 (1) B.N.S. has been added. The instructions letter dated 27.10.2025 is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sudhaker Prakash Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ateekurrahaman @ Chhote And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Of Home Deptt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) taken on record. 5. In the wake of the aforesaid development, since this is a case where the F.I.Rs. have been lodged from both the sides in a cognizable offence, therefore, the impugned F.I.R. may not be quashed inasmuch as happening of the incident in question may not be disputed by the parties. 6.However, after arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioners has requested that the petitioners may be given liberty to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law and direction may be issued to decide the same with expedition. 7. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue and considering the aforesaid innocuous request of learned counsel for the petitioners, we hereby dispose of this writ petition finally at the admission stage by giving liberty to the petitioners to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law within a period of two weeks from today and if such anticipatory bail application is filed by the petitioners within the aforesaid stipulated time, the same may be heard and disposed of on its own merit, strictly in accordance with law, with expedition without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the party. 8. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of finally. November3,2025 Suresh/ CRLP No. 9864 of 2025 2 (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench