Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:61594-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7200 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sumit Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raza Abbas,Syed Ali Murtaza Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard Sri S.A. Murtaza, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned A.G.A. for the State, and carefully perused the impugned First Information Report (F.I.R.) along with the material placed on record. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of the F.I.R. dated 01.04.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 0276 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 191(1), 191(2), 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.), and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, and have also prayed for a direction restraining the respondents from arresting the petitioners pursuant to the said F.I.R. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that no specific or overt act has been attributed to the petitioners in the impugned F.I.R. It has been urged that the petitioners were not even present at the scene of occurrence, and therefore, their alleged involvement is highly improbable and based on mere surmises. It is further submitted that the petitioners have not been charged under Section 3(5) of the B.N.S. (corresponding to Section 34 of the erstwhile IPC), and that the allegations levelled are fanciful and frivolous, making the F.I.R. liable to be quashed at the threshold. 4. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, opposing the writ petition, argued that the F.I.R. clearly narrates that members of two different communities had assembled at the spot, armed with deadly weapons, and created a law and order situation, resulting in injuries to several individuals. Thus, it was contended that cognizable offences are clearly made out against the accused persons, including the petitioners, warranting no interference at this stage. 5. Upon hearing the rival submissions and upon careful perusal of the record, it is evident that an incident did occur where two groups confronted each other and violence ensued, leading to injuries. The allegations against the petitioners, at this stage, cannot be said to be palpably absurd or inherently improbable. The veracity and credibility of the allegations are matters which must be tested during the course of investigation and subsequent trial. 6. In view of the legal principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335; M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918; and the judgments rendered in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh), decided on 07.10.2021, as well as Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 10913 of 2023 (Directorate of Enforcement vs. Niraj Tyagi & Others), this Court finds no ground for interference in the impugned F.I.R. 7. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that the petitioners shall be at liberty to seek appropriate relief before the competent court by way of applying for anticipatory bail/bail, which shall be considered strictly in accordance with law. (Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Order Date :- 23.4.2025 A.K.Srivastava Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad