2025:UHC:5842 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Criminal No. 712 of 2025 08th July, 2025 Musavver and others ………..Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Susheel Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of FIR No.0119 of 2025 dated 15.04.2025, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 324(4) and 352 of B.N.S. 2023, registered at Police Station Kaliyar Sharif, District Haridwar. 2. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that respondent no.3-Meerhasan (informant) is husband of petitioner no.3 – sister of petitioner nos.1 and 2. He further submitted that rather the informant Ali Hasan committed marpeet with petitioner no.3 sister of petitioner nos.1 and 2 and an FIR No.0119 of 2025 dated 15.02.2025 at about 18:08 hours registered at Police Station, annexure No. 2 to the writ petition, lodged by father of the petitioners against respondent no.3-Meerhasan and three other family members under Section 80 of B.N.S., 2023. 3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that due to that FIR the present FIR has been lodged by respondent no.3-Meerhasan. 4. From perusal of the record, it transpires that the FIR lodged by father of the petitioners-Tufail is much prior in time while the FIR lodged by respondent no.3-Meerhasan 1 2025:UHC:5842 is in counterblast of the FIR lodged by Tufail. 5. This argument of the petitioner cannot hold any water as from perusal of the record; FIR was lodged by respondent no.3-Meerhasan on 15.04.2025 at 11:00 hours with regard to incident of 14.04.2025, while Tufail lodged an FIR on 15.02.2025. 6. Learned State counsel submits that from the instruction which is in possession of learned State counsel there is head injury upon Aasif s/o respondent no.3- Meerhasan and therefore it cannot be believed that the FIR has been lodged to falsely implicate the petitioners. 7. From perusal of the FIR, it also transpires that there is prima facie commission of cognizable offence is made out, therefore, this Court need not to interfere as there is no good ground available to quash the FIR. 8. Accordingly writ petition is dismissed in limine. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 08.07.2025 SK 2