HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14988 of 2025 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 11.06.2025, giving rise to the Case Crime No. 262 of 2025, under section 69 of BNS, 2023, Police Station Saraimeer, District Azamgarh. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has not committed any crime with the daughter of respondent no. 3. It is further submitted that it is evident, from a perusal of the First Information Report and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS, that the victim is a major and a well educated girl. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present FIR is nothing but an abuse of process of Court which has been lodged mala fide due to earlier enmity between the petitioner and the respondent no. 3 and also on account of some dispute regarding transaction of money between them. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has never made physical relationship forcibly with the prosecutrix. It is in the last submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the present FIR has been lodged with malicious prosecution in order to harass the petitioner, it deserves to be quashed by this Court. 3. Per contra, Mr. Satya Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : Satya Prakash Singh, G.A. Rajkumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of Up And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) State have vehemently opposed the submissions and the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned A.G.A. submits that a plain reading of the FIR prima facie shows that a cognizable offence against the petitioner is made out. He has submitted that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S., has spoken inculpatory against the petitioner and supported the prosecution. Copies of the prosecutrix's statements, recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S., are appended as C.A.1 and C.A.2 to the counter affidavit filed by the informant. The prosecutrix in her statements, also stated that the petitioner made her pregnant and thereafter she has given birth to a baby girl. It is also submitted by the learned A.G.A. that looking to the serious nature of the offence, as narrated in the FIR and, thereafter, supported by the prosecutrix in her statements recorded under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S., a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, and, therefore, this petition do not deserves indulgence of this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Satya Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Mr. S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the documents available on record as well as the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under sections 180 and 183 Cr.P.C. 5. Taking into consideration the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, in particular, the fact that a perusal of the FIR prima facie shows commission of a cognizable offence, the fact that the prosecutrix has spoken inculpatory in her statement under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. and supported the prosecution version, we are of the opinion that this petition does not deserve this Court's indulgence in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. There is no merit in this petition and is liable to be dismissed. 6. It is, accordingly, dismissed. October 13, 2025 RPD CRLP No. 14988 of 2025 2 (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad