HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9869 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J. 1. Heard. 2. This Court had passed order on 03.11.2025, which reads as under: "1. Heard Sri S.K. Singh Kalhans, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-opposite parties no.1 to 3 and Sri Vinay Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party no.4. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioners have assailed the impugned FIR bearing FIR/ Case Crime No.0209 of 2025, under Sections 64(2)(f), 85, 352, 351(2) of B.N.S. 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Umari Begumganj, District- Gonda. 3. Learned AGA has produced photocopy of instructions letter dated 02.11.2025 provided by the Sub Inspector/ Investigating Officer, Police Station- Umari Begumganj, District- Gonda, the same is taken on record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned FIR is an outcome of matrimonial dispute between the parties wherein serious allegations have been levelled against the brother-in-law (Jeth) of the victim also and the petitioners have every hope, to the best of his instructions, that the issue may be settled amicably through Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. 5. Before sending the issue to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, consent of the parties would be required. So as to show their bonafide, petitioners no.2 & 3 shall produce a Demand Draft of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Suneel Kumar Singh Kalhans, Shikha Srivastava, Yogesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Vinay Kumar Tiwari Hans Raj Singh And Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) the name of complainant/ informant. 6. List on 19.11.2025. 7. On that date, petitioner no.2-Manish Kumar, petitioner no.3- Satish Kumar Singh and opposite party no.4 i.e. complainant/ informant shall appear in person before this Court. 8. If opposite party no.4 agrees to settle the dispute through Mediation and Conciliation Centre, the Demand Draft of Rs.50,000/- may be handed over to her. 9. Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the impugned FIR . 10. However, it is directed that petitioners no.1, 3, 4 & 5 shall appear before the Investigating Officer concerned alongwith certified copy of this order on 10.11.2025 at 11:00 AM sharp for the purpose to cooperate in the investigation. 11. It is made clear that if petitioners no.2 & 3 are not appeared before this Court on the date fixed, this interim order would not be extended." 3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, petitioner no. 2 (Manish Kumar) and petitioner no. 3 (Satish Kumar) as well as opposite party no. 4 (complainant/prosecutrix) are present in person. The petitioners are having a demand draft of Rs.50,000/-, making request that the same may be handed over to opposite party no. 4 (complainant/prosecutrix) and the matter may be referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court for amicable solution. 4. The opposite party no. 4 (complainant/prosecutrix) has denied the aforesaid proposal by submitting that she is not willing to settle the dispute amicably, rather she is willing that the issue in question be investigated and police report be filed. 5. Since the opposite party no. 4 (complainant/prosecutrix) has denied for mediation, the demand draft of Rs.50,000/- is not handed over to her and the matter is not referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court. 6. Shri S.K. Singh Kalhans, learned counsel for the petitioners, has stated that the petitioners have been falsely implicated and without CRLP No. 9869 of 2025 2 having any material or evidence, the allegation relating to Section 64(2)(f) B.N.S. has been levelled besides other allegations. However, after arguing at some length, he has requested that the petitioners may be given liberty to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court and direction may be issued to decide the same with expedition. 7. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue and considering the innocuous aforesaid request of learned counsel for the petitioners, we hereby dispose of this writ petition finally at the admission stage, giving liberty to the petitioners to file anticipatory bail application before the competent Court, taking all pleas and grounds, which are available to them, within four weeks from today and if such anticipatory bail application is filed, the same may be heard and disposed of on its own merit, with expedition, without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. November 19, 2025 MVS/- CRLP No. 9869 of 2025 3 (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench