Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40669-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5147 of 2025 Petitioner :- Aniket Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saksham Srivastava,Veerendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Atul Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Mr. Saksham Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State-respondents, Mr. Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material brought on the record. 2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for following principal reliefs:- "(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the First Information Report dated 31.07.2024 lodged by the respondent no.3, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023, bearing Case Crime No. 0118 of 2024 registered at Police Station Purkaji, District Muzaffar Nagar. (ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents concerned not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the First Information Report dated 31.07.2024 lodged by the respondent no.3, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 115(2), 351(3) of B.N.S., 2023, bearing Case Crime No. 0118 of 2024 registered at Police Station Purkaji, District Muzaffar Nagar." 3. At the very outset, Mr. G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State-respondents as well as Mr. Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the informant raised a preliminary objection qua the maintainability of the instant petition on two fold submissions i.e. firstly, the petitioner is not named in the impugned First Information Report in question and secondly, the petitioner has already invoked the writ jurisdiction by filing Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 482 BNSS No. - 1759 of 2025 (Aniket Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and another), wherein, learned Single Judge of this Court vide it's judgment and order dated 4.3.2025 has proceeded to reject the anticipatory bail preferred by the petitioner herein, however, learned Single Judge was pleased to accord interim relief in favour of the petitioner for a period of two weeks from the date of passing of that order or till the time of surrender of the petitioner before the court below precisely taking note to the mandate given by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, learned counsels for the contesting-respondents have raised objection by submitting that petitioner herein flouted the judgment and order dated 4.3.2025 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, wherein, categorical observation made by learned Single Judge to the effect that the Court did not find any good ground for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the matter however, leave was accorded to the petitioner to surrender before the Court below but instead of doing the same, the petitioner has turned up before this Court for ventilation of his grievance. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents further submits that during the course of the investigation, Section 209 of B.N.S., 2023 has also been added against the petitioner in the proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under such circumstances, the instant petition is liable to be dismissed with an exemplary costs. 5. Confronted with above situation, learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions has place reliance upon the judgment and order dated 18.12.2020 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Misc. Bench No. - 25222 of 2020 (Nasim Bano Vs. State of U.P. thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others) and submits that even if the anticipatory bail preferred by the petitioner is being rejected, the petitioner cannot be deprived of to invoke the writ jurisdiction. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that once the learned Single Judge on his own wisdom has proceeded to reject the application for anticipatory bail preferred by the petitioner and accorded two weeks' time to the petitioner to surrender before the Court below, instead of following the mandate given by the learned Single Judge, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition which is nothing but an abuse of process of law in view of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Daljit Singh Vs. State of Haryana @ Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 21. Moreover, the judgment i.e. Nasim Bano (supra) relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner is clearly distinguishable under the facts and circumstances of the instant matter. 7. In view of the above, this Court does not find any good ground to quash the impugned First Information Report and the instant petition sans merits and is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Sachin (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad