Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:62499-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7957 of 2025 Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Soni Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Saurabh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Shri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A for the State respondents. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 01.03.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 81 of 2025, under Sections 193, 420, 120-B IPC, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi. 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 in the present case. It is submitted that the forged signatures were made in the documents filed in the claim petition and on a proper investigation, it will be clearly reflected that he has not made any signature or documents which were submitted and therefore, no offence as alleged against the petitioner, who is owner of the vehicle is made out. 4. Shri Rahul Asthana, learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. 5. We have gone through the first information report that the present impugned first information report has been lodged by the Sub-Inspector himself and in case of frauds, in respect of the false Motor Accident Claims, SIT was constituted and investigation is continuing pursuant to the direction of this Court passed in Civil Revision No.49 of 2015 (ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Ramawati and others) dated 07.10.2015. 5. It has been specifically stated in the impugned FIR that the vehicle involved in the present case is also involved in several claim petitions, wherein the owner and drivers have been made parties and therefore, it is a case where the fraud has been committed to raise claims for Motor Accident compensation by filing petition on forged, false and fabricated ground. 6. Learned AGA has pointed out that the petitioner has criminal history of one case also. 7. We find substance in the arguments of learned AGA. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 8. 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. 9. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 RKM Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad