HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10382 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the FIR dated 20.09.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0181 of 2025, under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, Police Station Gosainganj, District Ayodhya. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie no offence whatsoever is disclosed against the petitioner and as such, the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioner, therefore, the impugned first information report can not be quashed in view of law laid down 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 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Santosh Kumar Dubey, Ajay Kumar Pandey, Rizwan Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Harikrishn Gupta (In Fir Harikrishn Gupta Assistant Director) .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration 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 petitioner, 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. 6. However in case, the petitioner files an application for anticipatory/regular bail before the appropriate court, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of. November 4, 2025 Nadim CRLP No. 10382 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- NADIM ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench