Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10612 of 2025 Petitioner :- Asad Khan Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Kumar Mishra,Shashi Kant Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Sri Shashi Kant, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned AGA for the State. 2. Present writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 24.4.2025 having Case Crime No. 184 of 2025 under Section 318(4), 316(2) BNS, P.S. Jhagha, District Gorakhpur. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in aforesaid case. 3. Sri Rahul Asthana, learned AGA for the State submitted that the name of the accused mentioned in the first information report is Arshad Khan whereas present petition has been filed by Asad Khan. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is the one and same person and his correct name is Asad Khan not Arshad Khan. There is a minor difference in his name, therefore, petition is maintainable. 5. We further find that co-accused has also filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 10614 of 2025 (Bijendra Singh vs. State of U.P. and others) by the same counsel, we therefore find no good ground to differ with the statement so made before us. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner has not committed any offence. He neither cheated any person nor any amount was given to him. It is the respondent no. 3 authorized to get job in different countries on behalf of the company and petitioner is nowhere concerned. 7. Perusal of first information report it is reflected that the money was taken by petitioner and some amount was also transferred online and informant was provided with visit visa of Dubai, therefore, the money was taken by playing fraud for giving job in Dubai. Therefore, the cognizance offence is made out. 8. 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. 9. The instant petition stands dismissed. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 SY Digitally signed by :- SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad