MANOJ KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND OTHERS
CRLP/9841/2025 · 2025-11-03
Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, Rajesh Singh Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 181668 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 181668 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9841 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J.
1. Heard Sri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anirudh Singh, learned A.G.A for the State-opposite parties.
2. In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite party no.3 is hereby dispensed with.
3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the impugned F.I.R. dated 02.10.2025, bearing F.I.R./Case Crime No.0209 of 2025, under Sections 69, 352, 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Karaundikalan District- Sultanpur.
4. Sri O.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and the impugned F.I.R has been lodged having ulterior motive and extraneous desire in the mind of the prosecutrix.
5. However, after arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that the petitioner may be given liberty to file anticipatory bail application before the Competent Court and the same may be decided on its own merit.
6. Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue; considering the aforesaid innocuous request of learned counsel for the petitioner, we hereby disposed of this petition finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioner to file anticipatory bail application before the Competent Court within a period of three weeks, taking all pleas and grounds which are available to him and, if such anticipatory bail application is filed within the aforesaid stipulated time, the same may be heard and disposed of with expedition on its own merit, without giving Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Shukla, O.P. Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Manoj Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.
7. Since we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issue therefore, the writ petition of the co-accused persons, if any, may be decided on its own merit.
8. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of. November 3, 2025 Preeti CRLP No. 9841 of 2025 2 (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench