Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30990-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4102 of 2025 Petitioner :- Munne @Firoz Raza Khan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs: "A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned first information report dated 18.2.2025 lodged by the respondent no.4 against the petitioners, as Case Crime No. 60 of 2025 Under Section 109, 115 (2), 351 (3) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (B.N.S.) 2023, Police Station - Milak, District - Rampur (Annexure no.1 to the writ petition). B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 & 3 not to arrest the petitioners in Case Crime No. 60 of 2025 Under Section 109, 115 (2), 351 (3) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (B.N.S.) 2023, Police Station - Milak, District Rampur." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations and no offences are made out against the petitioners. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. 5. The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation and 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 and the latest judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10913 of 2023 (Directorate of Enforcement vs. Niraj Tyagi & ors.), no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 6. The writ petition is disposed of leaving it open for the petitioners to apply before the competent court for bail/ anticipatory bail in accordance with law. 7. It is made clear that we have not adjudicated the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioners and the same are left open for the petitioners to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law. (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Order Date :- 5.3.2025/NLY Digitally signed by :- NAND LAL YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad