Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30562-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1077 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ruchi Tyagi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Bhardwaj Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sandeep Kumar Singh Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J. 1. Heard Sri Shantanu Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sandeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 24.12.2024, registered as Case Crime No. 754 of 2024, under Sections 140(1), 103(1), 238, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Kankerkhera, District Meerut. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. Challenging the impugned FIR, submissions of the petitioners is that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case due to family dispute between the informant and the accused no. 1 Smt. Ruchi Tyagi who is the daughter-in-law of the informant. It is submitted that the fact reveals that the alleged victim is the husband of the petitioner no. 1 who was living in extra-marital affair and the petitioner no. 1 has filed proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as well as under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act and the criminal prosecution has been lodged by filing an application under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. The application was filed after a much delay of four months from the date of alleged incident. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State submits that the victim is still missing and a cognizable offence is made out. On consideration of the ground so taken by the petitioners and on perusal of the record, we find that the ground so taken are nothing but the defence of the petitioners which cannot be considered for the purpose of the quashing of FIR and a cognizable offence is made out. That apart, perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 5. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Israr Digitally signed by :- ISRAR AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad