Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51262-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5443 of 2025 Petitioner :- Niranjan Bagha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Praveen Kumar Giri,J. 1. Heard Sri Pankaj Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned A.G.A for the State respondents. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 10.1.2024, registered as Case Crime No. 5 of 2024, under Section 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station Shahganj, District Sonbhadra. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and no offence is made out against the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has already entered into the agreement to sell the vehicle on 3.1.2024 at Bhubaneswar in favour of the co- accused Prakash Mahkud who was driving the vehicle and was arrested on the spot. It is submitted that with the agreement to sell he was handed over the vehicle with certain conditions. Submission, therefore, is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no role to play. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the resident of District Nayagarh, Odisha and he has no connection with the narcotics recovered from the vehicle. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. 5. We have gone through the first information report and we find that the vehicle carrying narcotics was recovered and at that time co-accused Prakash Mahakud in whose favour the petitioner allegedly executed the agreement to sell was driving the vehicle and he has named the petitioner. We also find that vehicle was carrying the narcotics which was loaded in State of Odhisha and therefore, the claim of selling the vehicle through notarised agreement to sell dated 3.1.2024 on a stamp paper is nothing but the defence of the petitioner. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 6. 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 :- 9.4.2025 Abhishek Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad