Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141076-DB Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15742 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohammad Faij Farook Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Qazi Vakil Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Santosh Rai,J. Order on Amendment Application Amendment application filed by learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record. Amendment Application is allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner may carry out amendment in the writ petition during the course of the day. Order on Writ Petition 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are assailing the legality and validity of the FIR dated 26.06.2025 lodged in Case Crime No.0016 of 2025, under Sections- 318 (4), 319(2), 308(6), 61(2) and 111 B.N.S. and Section 66D Information Technology (Amendment) Act,2008 Police Station- Cyber Crime Police Thana, Bareilly District- Barelly. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that no offence against the petitioners are disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioners involve factual disputes and appraisal of evidence. 4. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioners at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under article 226 of Constitution of India. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. 5. The prayer for quashing the FIR of the aforesaid case is refused. 6. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioners appears before the court below within 60 days from today and applies for bail/anticipatory bail, their prayer for bail/anticipatory bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 7. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of. 8. However, in case, the petitioners do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them. 9. It is made clear that the petitioners will not be granted any further time by this Court for surrendering before the court below as directed above. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Asha Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad