Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87679-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10627 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ram Bahadur And 6 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Sri Satya Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ghanshyam Kumar, learned A.G.A for the State respondents. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 11.5.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 0075 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 125, 109(1) BNS, Police Station Kaila Devi, District Sambhal. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have been falsely implicated and no offence is made out against the petitioners. It is submitted that present prosecution has been lodged with mala fide intention. It is further submitted that the injured were never medically examined and there is no medical report available on record and it is a case of no injury. It is further submitted that informant's side has village pradhan rivalry with petitioner no. 1 and his family. It is submitted that the wife of petitioner no. 1, Ram Bahadur is the Gram Pradhan and as such, it is a case of mala fide and false prosecution because of Pradhan election rivalry. 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. It is submitted that specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioners and in the first information report itself it is mentioned that the incident had taken place because of villge pradhan rivalry and as per record available with him there is injury report available on record. 5. We find substance in the arguments of learned AGA. We further find that the arguments so raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners are nothing but defence which cannot be considered for quashing the FIR. 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. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Abhishek Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad