HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 22447 of 2025 Court No. - 44 HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J. HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J. Heard Mr. Shalvin, learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the motion to admit this petition to hearing at great length and Mr. Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents. This petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR dated 03.09.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No.0389 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2) and 352 B.N.S., Police Station Tundla, District Firozabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been implicated malafide because he is a witness in another crime registered against the first informant by co-accused Himmat Lal Kumavat. He submits that, in fact, the impugned FIR ropes in Himmat Lal Kumavat and the petitioner because of the earlier FIR lodged by Himmat Lal Kumavat, giving rise to Case Crime No.108 of 2025, under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Tundla, District Firozabad. Despite the very persuasive arguments advanced by Mr. Shalvin on behalf of the petitioner which emphasis circumstance to suggest that there could be a case of abuse of process, when we look into the allegation in the FIR, we find that what the informant reports is a matter involving security of the Indian Ordnance Factory and, more than that, National Security. We would not wish to detail the projects that were in hand of the Ordnance Factory at the time, for reason that the same would itself imperial National Security. Bearing in mind, the sensitivity of the projects being undertaken by the Ordnance Factory, the informant, as the Security Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shalvin Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Vipin Kathiyar Alias Vipin Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Officer, had ordered certain security measures. The petitioner and the co- accused committed breach of both security measures. The co-accused is said to have brought in a foreign citizen into a sensitive area of the Ordnance Factory, without security clearance. The other allegation against the petitioner is that while functioning as Security Officers at the Ordnance Factory, they permitted use of smart phones in violation of an order forbidding it, considering the sensitivity of the enterprises being undertaken. In the totality of the circumstances, that the impugned FIR brings forth, we are of the opinion that this is a case involving National Security, where this Court should not interfere at the stage of investigation at all. We, therefore, decline to interfere and dismiss this writ petition summarily. October 13, 2025 Anurag/- CRLP No. 22447 of 2025 2 (Sanjiv Kumar,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad