Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45814 (ALL)

BALVEER SINGH AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

CRLP/8125/2025 · 2025-05-04

Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Sandeep Chaudhary Joint Registrar Judicial

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71641-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8125 of 2025 Petitioner :- Balveer Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Durga Shanker Mishra,G.A.,Kuldeep Kumar Dixit Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondents, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material brought on the record. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 04.04.2025 registered as Case Crime No.140 of 2025, under Sections 333, 140(2), 127, 308(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. & under Section 7A of Prevention of Corruption Act-1988, P.S. - Fatehganj West, District- Bareilly. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations and no offences are made out against the petitioners. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. 5. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 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. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioners to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law. Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Sachin (Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad