Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17929 (ALL)

JEENAT @ JEENAT JAN AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

CRLP/2649/2025 · 2025-02-13

Mohd Azhar Husain Idrisi, Rajiv Gupta

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20453-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2649 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jeenat @ Jeenat Jan And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hasan Parvej Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record 2. The instant writ petition is being filed by the petitioners seeking the quashing of FIR dated 14.1.2025 registered as Case Crime no. 48 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 74, 76, 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station Baherhi, District Bareilly. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioners and, as such, the instant first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of is clearly disclosed against the petitioners and, as such, the first information report cannot be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779 and 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. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and going through 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. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 M. Tarik Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad