HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6803 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. appearing for the respondents No.1 to 3 and Shri Uma Kant Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4. 2. In pursuance to the earlier order of this Court, the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.4 are also present before this Court. 3. From a perusal of the impugned F.I.R. dated 20.05.2025 bearing F.I.R. / Case Crime No.0160 of 2025, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 354-B of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Bijnore, District Lucknow, it emerges that a matrimonial dispute is going on between the parties. An endeavour had been made by this Court to have the matter settled amicably amongst the parties by sending them to the Mediation Centre of this Court. 4. The mediation centre has submitted its report dated 28.10.2025 whereby the mediation was completed but no agreement has been arrived at between the parties and thus the Court proceeds to hear and decide the matter on merits. 5. Upon perusal of the impugned F.I.R., it would be apparent that a cognizable offences are made out against the petitioner, consequently, there cannot be any occasion for interference in the F.I.R. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Babu Ram, Anirsh Chetan Tiwari, Dileep Kumar Tiwari, Ram Sajiwan Yadav, Sunil Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Uma Kant Gupta Sanjeev Yadav And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) 6. At this stage, earned A.G.A. appearing for respondents-State has given a statement on behalf of investigating agency that because the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners entails sentence of less than seven years, provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be strictly followed in terms of judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in re; Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another - (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and another- (2022) 10 SCC 51. 7. Considering the stand of the investigating agency, learned counsel for the petitioners states that his petition be disposed of in view of the above said facts. 8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of in view of the provisions of Section 35(3) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the law as laid down by the Apex Court in re; Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 9. However, it is directed that the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the concerned police station, whenever they are required, to cooperate in the investigation. Thereafter, they shall continue to cooperate in the investigation till its completion, failing which, protection of this order may be withdrawn on the application being moved by the prosecution or the complainant. 10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. November 20, 2025 S. Shivhare CRLP No. 6803 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench