Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23004-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3083 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ajay Pandey And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ankita Deol,Rajiv Lochan Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Amit Sinha, learned AGA for the State. 2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 12.1.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0010 of 2025 under Sections 115 (2), 191 (2), 352, 351 (3), 324 (4) BNS, P.S. Surauli, District Deoria and for a direction to the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioners in pursuance of impugned First Information Report. 3. By the impugned FIR, it is alleged that criminal offence under sections 115 (2), 191 (2), 352, 351 (3), 324 (4) BNS was committed on 12.1.2025 at about 8.00 a.m. involving the petitioners herein. The informant is aged about 70 years. Challenging the impugned FIR, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Civil Suit No. 851 of 2024 Phoolpur Devi vs. Ram Nivas Pandey for permanent injunction is pending between the parties. One incident has taken place on 17.12.2024 wherein challan report was submitted. It was next submitted by drawing attention towards certain document that petitioner no.1 Ajay Pandey son of late Sri Ajeet Pandey was not present on the spot. Therefore, a plea of aliby is being asserted in respect of petitioner no.1 only. Attention was also drawn to the complaint made to the Chief Minister no 11.1.2025 and, therefore, it is submitted that in fact the offence as alleged has never taken place and the allegations have been levelled with mala fide intention by way of peshbandi and the criminal prosecution is absolutely false and mala fide. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer. 5. We find that pendency of civil dispute and plea of aliby is nothing but defence of petitioner no.1 which cannot be considered for quashing of the FIR. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 6. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 7. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Madhurima Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad