Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82352-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10039 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt Priyanka And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Harvir Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 1.7.2023, giving rise to Case Crime No.414 of 2023, under Sections 420 and 409 I.P.C., P.S. Bhojipura, District Bareilly. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioners and, as such, the instant first information report is liable to be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has drawn attention of the Court to the order dated 21.4.2025 passed by A.C.J.M, Bareilly wherein the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners and it has been held that the petitioners have not been cooperating in the investigation at all. He has further submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of is clearly disclosed against the petitioners and, as such, the first information report cannot be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case 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. 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have not been cooperating in the investigation and even proclamation under section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued, which order has not been challenged and allegations made in the FIR and the relevant law cited by the learned AGA and the fact that impugned FIR disclosed cognizable offence, we are of the opinion that the impugned FIR cannot be quashed. 7. The prayer for quashing the impugned first information report is, therefore, refused. 8. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 R Digitally signed by :- RAM ASARE MORYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad