HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10844 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 2.11.2025, giving rise to Case Crime No. 0559 of 2025, under Section 229, 233, 237, 246, 318(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) 340(2) BNS (old section 193, 196, 200, 209, 417, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC), Police Station- Kotwali City, District- Pratapgarh. 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. 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, 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 taking into consideration the allegations made in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Seema Kashyap, Uma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ram Prasad And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) the impugned F.I.R. and the relevant law cited by learned A.G.A. for the State and the fact that impugned F.I.R. prima facie discloses cognizable offence against the petitioners and noting the submissions made by learned AGA, we are of the opinion that impugned first information report can not be quashed. 6. The prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is, therefore, refused. 7. However, in case, the petitioners file an application for anticipatory/ regular bail before the appropriate Court, their bail application be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 8. With these observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. November 27, 2025 R CRLP No. 10844 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM ASARE MORYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench