Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83710-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9520 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rashid And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Ashfaq Ahmed Ansari,G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Harvir Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State, Sri Ashfaq Ahmed Ansari, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 08.04.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0157 of 2025, under Sections 333, 74, 70(1), 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 67a of I.T. Act, Police Station Meerganj, District Bareilly. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioners and as such, the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.4 has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioners, therefore, the impugned first information report can not be quashed in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and in a recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in the first information report and the relevant law cited by learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence against the petitioners, we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report can not be quashed, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is refused. 6. The instant writ petition is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 19.5.2025 SFH Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad