Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87573-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10616 of 2025 Petitioner :- Abhishek Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents and Sri Rajiv Ratan Shukla along with Sri Munender Kumar Gaur, learned counsel appearing for the informant, whose Vakalatnama filed today is taken on record. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 19.12.2024 registered as Case Crime No. 486 of 2024 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, Police Station Ecotech-III, District Gautambuddha Nagar. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. Admittedly, the petitioner is not named in the first information report. 4. We find that the petition filed by the named accused Amit Kumar being Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 4056 of 2025 (Amit Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others) was dismissed on merits on 20.3.2025 by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court of which one of us (V.K.Birla,J.) was a member. The aforesaid order dated 20.3.2025 is quoted as under:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Ajay Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A for the State respondents and Sri Munender Kumar Gaur, learned counsel for the informant. 3. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 19.12.2024, registered as Case Crime No. 0486 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, Police Station Ecotech III, District Gautambudh Nagar. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 4. Challenging the impugned FIR, submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that co-accused Sunil Kumar has executed a sale deed in favour of Shivani relating to Khasra No. 176 area 60 sq. feet on 7.4.2022. Subsequently Pooja has executed a sale deed in favour of Payal relating to the same Khasra number vide sale deed dated 2.9.2022. It is submitted that the petitioner has not sold the property to either of the purchasers and he is not marginal witness of the sale deed and he is not beneficiary. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated for the reason that the husband of the petitioner Umesh Kumar had one agreement to sale executed on 17.9.2023 for purchasing the land and the petitioner was paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- in this regard. It is submitted that with mala fide intention by fabricating the facts the impugned FIR has been lodged. 5. In the supplementary affidavit, criminal history of four cases including the present one has been explained. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant submits that incomplete documents have been annexed with the petition and he sought to produce complete photocopy of the documents annexed with the petition. It was further pointed out that the petitioner is a land mafia and involved in such matters and large number of persons have raised grievance against the petitioner with the police authorities. Details of applications for lodging FIR by 13 other such aggrieved persons have been placed before this Court. 7. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence and on instructions he submits that large number of persons have filed their applications for lodging the FIR against the petitioner herein who is actively involved in such land dealings. 8. We find substance in the arguments learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 9. 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. 10. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed." 5. Learned A.G.A. on instructions pointed out that against the named accused a charge-sheet has already been forwarded on 18.4.2025. 6. We find that the present petition is not maintainable in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in SLP (Criminal) No. 762 of 2020 (Hukum Chand Garg and others vs. State of U.P. and others) decided on 7.2.2022. 7. In such view of the matter, present petition is not maintainable on behalf of the petitioner and the same is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Lalit Shukla Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad