HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23169 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J. 1. Heard Mr. Javed Khan, the learned counsel for petitioner- Shadab @ Mohd. Shadab and the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1 to 3. 2. Perused the record. 3. Petitioner-Shadab @ Mohd. Shadab has approached this Court by means of present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 29.09.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0207 of 2025, under Section 109(1) Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita-2023 and Section 3/25 Arms Act-1959, P.S.- Utraon, District- Prayagraj. 4. At the very outset, the learned counsel for petitioner submits that co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 22908 of 2025 (Saud @ Saud Ahamad Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others) has granted protection to the co-accused. For ready reference the order dated 09.10.2025 passed in above mentioned writ petition is reproduced here- in-below: "Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for State-respondents. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 29.09.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0207 of 2025 under sections- 109(1) BNS and, Section 3/25 Arms Act, 1959, Police Station- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Javed Khan, Parvez Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shadab @ Mohd Shadab .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Utraon, District - Nagar (Commissionerate Prayagraj) and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of impugned First Information Report. With regard to the allegations made in the F.I.R., investigating officer of the police is investigating the matter. The implication of petitioner is under Section 109 B.N.S. Causing injury or not causing the same is not relevant. Intention to cause the murder is relevant. Intention of the petitioner was only to evade arrest by the police and they fired only to frighten the police. For implication under Section 109 B.N.S., intention forms necessary ingredient of offence in any particular case. It necessarily precedes the act and should be discernible from the allegations on record, which is lacking in this case. After hearing the rival contentions, totality of facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ petition No. 7463/2024 (Shobhit Nehra Vs. State of U.P.), the above noted writ petition is disposed of directing the investigating officer to conclude the investigation of this case within period of 60 days. During the period of investigation and till cognizance is taken on the police report by the court concerned, the petitioner/petitioners shall not be arrested. In case of non-cooperation with the police investigation by the petitioner/petitioners, it shall be open for either of the respondents to file recall application of this order." 5. The learned A.G.A. could not point out any such distinguishing feature from the record on the basis of which aforementioned order could be so distinguished so as to make it inapplicable to the case of the present petitioner. 6. In view of above, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of above order dated 09.10.2025. October 13, 2025 Sharad/- CRLP No. 23169 of 2025 2 (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad