Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78295-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9566 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rehana Parveen @ Rehana Bano Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-X,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 10.2.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 34 of 2025, under Sections 105, 125, 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Kundarki, District- Moradabad (Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest or harass the petitioner in pursuance of impugned First Information Report." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR has been lodged on false/vexatious/mischievous allegations and no offences are made out against the petitioner. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. 5. The correctness of the allegations would have to be tested on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation as by insertion of notification No.1058/79-V-1-19-1 (Ka)-20-2018 dated 6th June 2019 and 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 and the latest judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10913 of 2023 (Directorate of Enforcement vs. Niraj Tyagi & ors.), no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 6. The writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law. 7. It is made clear that we have not adjudicated the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and the same are left open for the petitioner to raise at an appropriate stage in an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law. (Anil Kumar-X,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Order Date :- 13.5.2025 A.K.Srivastava Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad