Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68570-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8428 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mayank And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Shankar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Sri Shyam Shnkar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State respondents. 2. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 02.04.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0088 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 109 B.N.S. 2023, P.S. Lodha, District Azamgarh and for a direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of impugned First Information Report. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the present first information report has been lodged to the counter blast to the first information report lodged by the petitioners' side on 26.03.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 85 of 2025, under sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 126(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S. 2023 in respect of incident dated 26.03.2025 and this incident is shown to have taken place on 01.04.2025. He further submits that in any case no offence as alleged is made out in as much as Bhupendra father of the informant has sustained minor injury and the injury is not on vital part and, therefore, no offence as alleged is made out against the petitioners and attempt is being made to arrest the petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioners. 5. We find that the date of the incidents are different and weapons have been allegedly used in the First Information Report lodged by the petitioners in that case also and we cannot ignore the possibility of the incident subsequently taken place on 01.04.2025, though it is a matter of investigation. However, the submission raised by the counsel for the petitioners is nothing but a defence of the petitioners. 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 :- 30.4.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad