HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14159 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard Shri Kamaluddin, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.D.Pandey, learned AGA for the State respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India for quashing the impugned FIR dated 07.8.2019 registered as FIR No. 0143, under Sections 420, 467, 468 IPC, P.S. Sirauli, District Bareilly and for direction to the respondents not to arrest the petitioners pursuant to the aforesaid FIR. 3. The present writ petition was taken on 16.7.2025 and on the said date, the coordinate Bench had proceeded to pass the following order:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is the second writ petition. First petition of the petitioners was decided by the coordinate Bench of Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J and Hon'ble Prashant Kumar, J being Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.19311 of 2024. 3. Put up this case as a fresh case before the same Bench, if required, after obtaining nomination from Hon'ble The Chief Justice, whenever the Bench is available." 4. Accordingly, in view of the administrative order passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice dated 03.8.2025, the matter has been assigned to this Bench. 5. At the outset, Sri S.D.Pandey, learned AGA has raised an objection qua the maintainability of the writ petition and submits that for the same cause Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Arun Pratap Singh, Kamaluddin Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Hasnain Khan And 5 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) of action, the second writ petition is not maintainable, as earlier the petitioners had challenged the same very FIR in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 19311 of 2024, wherein the Court had opined that the cognizable offence is made out and dismissed the writ petition vide an order dated 22.11.2024. However, the leave was accorded to the petitioners to apply before the competent court for anticipatory bail/bail as permissible under law. He submits that as the petitioners were parties in the earlier writ petition and for the same cause of action, the second writ petition is not maintainable, in view of Rule 7 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 and the same is liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost. 6. Confronted with this situation, Shri Kamaluddin, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the other co-accused had preferred Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. Nos.9776 of 2023 (Omveer vs. State of UP and another); 2478 of 2025 (Netrapal Singh Yadav and another vs. State of UP and another) and 2383 of 2025 (Deshraj and another vs. State of U.P.) and learned Single Judge vide orders dated 06.9.2023, 10.04.2025 and 11.04.2025 had accorded anticipatory bail to the co-accused till submission of police report. He submits that unfortunately the petitioners had also preferred Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No.2862 of 2025 and without any instruction, the applicant/petitioners' counsel had withdrawn the same vide order dated 17.5.2025 with liberty to surrender and apply for regular bail. He submits that even though no such permission was given by the petitioners to withdraw the anticipatory bail. Except the petitioners, all other co-accused, who are named in the FIR, were accorded anticipatory bail by the learned Single Judge and the petitioners, whose names were surfaced during the investigation, had been denied the rightful claim. As such, this Court should come for rescue and reprieve to the petitioners. 7. In the facts and circumstances, we find that the second writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed. 8. Once we declined to accord any relief to the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant writ petition may be CRLP No. 14159 of 2025 2 dismissed as withdrawn and leave may be accorded to file an application for recalling the order dated 17.05.2025. 9. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed, as not pressed. September 18, 2025 A.K.Srivastava CRLP No. 14159 of 2025 3 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad