Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9948 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ramchandra And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R S Dubey,Savita Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The writ petition has been filed praying for quashing the F.I.R. dated 31.03.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No.0181 of 2025, under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 190, 115 (2), 351 (3), 352, 333, 324 (4), 109, 125 and 119 (1) of BNS, 2023, Police Station-Gida, District-Gorakhpur. 3. There is direct allegation against petitioner nos.1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 of committing the alleged offences. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. The present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. 5. So far as the petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8, Ramchandra, Dharamnath, Manoj, Pramod and Raju, are concerned following order is being passed:- 'From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.' 6. The prayer for quashing the FIR on behalf of petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 in the aforesaid case is refused. 7. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 appear and surrender before the court below within 60 days from today and apply for bail/anticipatory bail, their prayer for bail/anticipatory bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 8. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is dismissed on behalf of petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8. 9. However, in case, the petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them. 10. It is made clear that the petitioner nos, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the court below as directed above. 11. So far as the petitioner nos.5, 6 and 7, Seema, Pooja and Reema are concerned following order is being passed:- 'The writ petition is disposed of on behalf of petitioner nos.5, 6 and 7 directing that till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioner nos.5, 6 and 7 pursuant to the impugned First Information Report, subject to cooperation in ongoing investigation.' Order Date :- 22.5.2025 Ashish/- Digitally signed by :- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad