Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21291 (ALL)

SUSHEELA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/3455/2025 · 2025-03-04

Mohd Azhar Husain Idrisi, Vivek Kumar Birla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31042-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3455 of 2025 Petitioner :- Susheela And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Janardan Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J. 1. Heard Sri Janardan Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A for the State respondents. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 17.1.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 22 of 2025 under Sections 3(5), 115(2), 353, 351(2), 333, 109, 110 of B.N.S., Police Station Maharajganj, District Azamgarh. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that no offence under Sections 109 and 110 of B.N.S. is made out against the petitioners and the petitioners were never involved in the incident and they have been falsely implicated in the present case because of village partibandi and there were enmity between the parties. Attention was drawn to the injury report to submit that it is a case of simply injury. 4. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence and submits that there is specific allegation of enmity and the injury is admitted. 5. Perusal of records reveals that all such grounds that are being taken are nothing but the defence of the petitioners and the same cannot be considered for the purpose of quashing of the impugned first information report once the incident is admitted. 6. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 7. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Lalit Shukla Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad