HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9953 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J. 1. Heard Dr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA for the State- opposite parties no.1 to 3. 2. In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite party no.4 is hereby dispensed with. 3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the impugned FIR bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0267 of 2025, under Sections 64, 61(2) & 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station- Khiron, District- Raebareli. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. He has further submitted that even if the prosecution story so narrated in the FIR is taken on its face value, it is highly improbable that the present petitioner had taken the prosecutrix with him in his car and she did not raise any alarm. She remained with him for quite long time without raising any alarm. He has further submitted that the prosecutrix is a lady of dubious character inasmuch as she has implicated one other person having motive to extract some money from him. 5. Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned AGA, has produced copy of instructions letter dated 25.10.2025 provided by the Inspector, Police Station- Khiron, District- Raebareli, the same is taken on record. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sanjay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Pintu @ Bijendra Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) 6. As per the aforesaid instructions, statements of the prosecutrix under Sections 180 & 183 of BNSS have been recorded wherein she has levelled allegations against the present petitioner. Learned AGA has further submitted that since the investigation is going on, therefore, culpability of the present petitioner would be ascertained during the course of the investigation. As per Ms. Tripathi, since statements of the prosecutrix under Sections 180 & 183 of BNSS are intact, therefore, the impugned FIR may not be quashed. In that case, no interim protection may be granted to the petitioner. 7. On that, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that though this is the case of false implication but liberty may be given to the petitioner to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law and direction may be issued to decide the same with expedition. 8. Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, considering the aforesaid innocuous request of learned counsel for the petitioner, we hereby permit the petitioner to file anticipatory bail application before the competent court of law, taking all pleas and grounds, which are available to him, within a period of three weeks from today and if such anticipatory bail application is filed, the same may be heard and disposed of with expedition without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. November 12, 2025 RBS/- CRLP No. 9953 of 2025 2 (Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench