Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118782-DB Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7501 of 2025 Petitioner :- Kapil Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jawahir Yadav,Suneel Thekma,Tanisha Jahangir Monir Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Nipun Singh,Ritaj Vikram Singh Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J. 1. Heard Sri Jawahir Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Abhishek Mishra, holding brief of Sri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is assailing the legality and validity of the FIR dated 19.02.2025 lodged in Case Crime No. 99 of 2025, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Sector-39, District- G.B. Nagar. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no offence against the petitioner is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence. 4. Learned counsel for the parties is agreed that the charge sheet has already been filed in this case. 5. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioner at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. 6. The prayer for quashing the FIR of the aforesaid case is refused. 7. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioner appears and surrenders before the court below within 60 days from today and applies for bail/anticipatory bail, his prayer for bail/anticipatory bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 8. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of. 9. However, in case, the petitioner does not appears before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him. 10. It is made clear that the petitioner will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the court below as directed above. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Shivangi (Avnish Saxena, J.) (Siddharth, J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad