Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 82383 (ALL)

DR. RITA YADAV @ MANITA YADAV AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/17542/2025 · 2025-08-10

Abdul Shahid, Rajiv Gupta

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135490-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17542 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dr. Rita Yadav @ Manita Yadav And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Babul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ran Vijay Singh Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Abdul Shahid,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 19.6.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 113 of 2025, under Sections 105, 351 (3) of B.N.S., Police Station Bahariya, District Prayagraj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie no offence, complained of, is disclosed against the petitioners. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, is clearly disclosed against the petitioners and, as such, the first information report cannot be quashed in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and in a recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioners and as such, we are not inclined to quash the impugned first information report. 6. The prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is, therefore, refused. 7. However, in case, the petitioners file applications for anticipatory/ regular bail before the appropriate Court, their bail application be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law. 8. With these observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 sfa/ Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad