HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20634 of 2025 Court No. - 42 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Dheeraj Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A for the State respondents. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. registered as Case Crime No. 42 of 2025 under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of B.N.S., Police Station Hanumant Vihar, District Kanpur Nagar. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. has raised preliminary objection that in paragraph 22 of the petition it has been categorically stated that the petitioner has no other criminal history, whereas the petitioner has criminal history of nine cases including present one. He further pointed out that the other criminal history includes the offences of similar nature and including one criminal case of extortion under Section 386 IPC. He further pointed out that the preliminary report is against the petitioner, which is on record. 4. Learned A.G.A. has produced list of criminal history, which is taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is purchaser of the land and the allegations are against the seller. 6. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, which discloses cognizable offence. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dheeraj Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sunil Kumar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 7. We have gone through the record carefully. We find that the first information report reveals commission of cognizable offence, coupled with the fact that false statement has been made in the petition that the petitioner has no criminal history, however, the petitioner has criminal history of nine cases. 8. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 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. 9. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. September 15, 2025 Lalit Shukla CRLP No. 20634 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Vivek Kumar Birla,J.) Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad