Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144625-DB Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18371 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohd. Faizan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J. Hon'ble Harvir Singh,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 3.7.2025 giving rise to Case Crime No. 0138 of 2025, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Saharanpur. 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 and, as such, the instant first information report is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that in respect of the land in question, the petitioners had taken a sum of Rs. 5,70,000/- from the respondent No. 4, however, subsequently, they refused to execute a sale-deed on the pretext that land in question belongs to a member of Scheduled Caste, consequent to which, sale-deed could not be executed. It is next alleged that when respondent No. 4 further probed into the matter, it was revealed that petitioners after selling the land to respondent no.4 had surreptitiously transferred it to another person with oblique motive. 5. He has next submitted from the allegation made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of 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 and 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. 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that in respect of land in question, the petitioners had taken a sum of Rs. 5,70,000/- from the respondent No. 4, however, subsequently, they refused to execute a sale-deed on the pretext that the land in question belongs to a member of Scheduled Caste, consequent to which, sale-deed could not be executed. Further, when respondent No. 4 probed into the matter, it was revealed that petitioners after selling the land to her had further surreptitiously transferred it to another person with oblique motives, as such, in view of the allegations made in the first information report and the relevant law cited by the learned AGA and the fact that impugned first information report discloses cognizable offence, we are of the opinion that the impugned first information report cannot be quashed. 7. The prayer for quashing of the first information report is therefore, refused. 8. However, in case the petitioners files an application for anticipatory bail before the appropriate court, their bail application be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 9. With these observations, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 KU Digitally signed by :- KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad