Court No. - 44 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9293 of 2025 Petitioner :- Shivam Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nasiruddin Warsi Counsel for Respondent :- Dileep Kumar Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Madan Pal Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Dileep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for first informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 8th April, 2025 registered as Case Crime No. 44 of 2025, under Sections 352, 109, 110 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station-Ravindra Nagar Dhoos, District-Kushinagar and a direction to the respondent authorities not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned first information report. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that offence under Section 109 and also under Section 110 had been alleged against the petitioner, which is highly improbable. On the above premise, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant submit that the injured has sustained as many 7 injuries as per the medical examination report and they are all serious in nature. He further submits that investigation has to take place and Investigating Officer would thereafter opine as to whether under Section 109 or Section 110 of B.N.S. the trial had to take place. On the above premise, learned A.G.A. submits that since a cognizable offence has been made out against the petitioner, therefore, no interference is warranted in the impugned first information report. 5. 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 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. (Madan Pal Singh, J.) (Siddhartha Varma, J.) Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Sushil/- Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad