Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117995-DB Court No. - 45 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 13515 of 2025 Petitioner :- Anoop Kumar Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajneesh Kumar Singh,Sanjay Vikram Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J. Hon'ble Sandeep Jain,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents. 2. The Additional Government Advocate has filed a counter affidavit which is taken on record. 3. The present petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned press note issued by respondents no.2 on 11.06.2025 whereby the petitioner has been declared as notorious criminal, in the interest of justice. (ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents no.2 and 3 not to lodge any fresh FIR relating to any old or previous incident happened before 12.06.2025, in the facts and circumstances of the case." 4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the date 12.06.2025 has been wrongly transcribed as 11.06.2025 in the writ petition and the prayer no.1. 5. A reading of the press note referred in paragraph No.1 does not show that the petitioner is being prosecuted or being summoned by the police officials only because he is a defence lawyer in any case. The press note shows that the petitioner is suspected of indulging in certain criminal activities which includes forcible possession of landed property and other offences mentioned in the BNS. 6. In case the recitals in the press note are factually incorrect, the petitioner has the remedy to approach the appropriate Court by instituting a suit for defamation and its not a case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. Apart from the aforesaid, the counter affidavit filed by the AGA shows that six criminal cases had been registered against the petitioner for serious offences and in three of the aforesaid cases the petitioner is still wanted by the police. 8. The counter affidavit also discloses that non-bailable warrant has also been issued against the petitioner in one case and proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. for declaring the petitioner as absconder has also been instituted. 9. For the aforesaid reason also we refuse to interfere on behalf of the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 10. So far as the prayer No.2 is concerned a reading of the same itself shows that it is not maintainable. No order can be issued permanently restraining the law enforcing agency not to register a FIR against the petitioner if he is found to have indulged in any activity committing an offence prior to the date mentioned in the prayer clause. 11. The writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Himanshu Digitally signed by :- HIMANSHU YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad