HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 19240 of 2026 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE DEVENDRA SINGH-I, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the first information report dated 23.06.2026, giving rise to Case Crime No. 465 of 2026, under Section 316(5) of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahr. 3. As per the allegations made in the impugned first information report, it is alleged that on 17.06.2026, 785 crates of foreign liquor, belonging to licensee- Rajendra Singh Chadda, was entrusted for transportation from Kanpur Dehat to Noida by Delhi U.P. Road-Lines Transport through truck bearing Registration No. RJ-14-GJ-8316. The said vehicle was driven by the co-accused Muzammil and the said 785 crates of foreign liquor was to reach at its destination by 19.06.2026, however, by the said date, the loaded goods did not reach its destination at Noida. 4. On 21.06.2026, the truck was found lying over turned in village Dostpur, District Bulandshahr, however, information in respect of the said incident was only given to the first informant on 22.06.2026. On getting the said information, the first informant along with the police personnels reached at the place of incident and found that the crates of foreign liquor loaded in the truck for transportation is far less than that was actually entrusted for transportation. On physical verification, out of 785 crates of liquor, 574 crates of liquor was found missing. On Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhitab Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Wasif Ali .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) contacting the owner of the vehicle- Wasif Ali (petitioner) and his driver- Muzammil, they did not give proper reply and switched off their Mobile Phone. On the basis of aforesaid misappropriation of 574 crates of foreign liquor, which was entrusted for transportation, the impugned F.I.R was lodged against the petitioner along with his driver- Muzammil. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. 6. It is next submitted that from the allegations made in impugned the FIR, no offence whatsoever is disclosed against the petitioner and as such, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed. 7. Learned counsel next submitted that the petitioner, who is the owner of the truck, is not at all concerned with the transportation of the liquor entrusted to him and therefore, he could not be held liable for the offence and the impugned F.I.R qua the petitioner is liable to be quashed. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted as per the prosecution case, 785 crates of foreign liquor was handed over to for its transportation, however, it did not reach its destination and on the way, 574 crates of foreign liquor was found misappropriated, thus, prima facie, offence, complained of, is clearly disclosed against the petitioner. Being the owner of the vehicle, by which the foreign liquor was being transported and has been misappropriated and as such, he cannot escape his liability and prima facie, offence, complained of, is clearly disclosed against the petitioner. 9. Learned AGA has further submitted that from the allegations made in the first information report, prima facie offence, complained of is clearly disclosed against the petitioner 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 CRLP No. 19240 of 2026 2 the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others and in view thereof, no interference at this stage is required in the instant writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 10. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the specific allegation of the involvement of the petitioner in the said misappropriation, wherein 574 crates of foreign liquor has been found missing and did not reach its destination, as such, prima facie, an offence, complained of, is clearly disclosed against the petitioner. 11. Further, keeping view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as discussed in the preceding paragraphs and submissions made by learned AGA for the State as well as in view of seriousness and gravity of offence, we are of the opinion that the impugned F.I.R., which clearly discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, cannot be nipped in the bud at this nascent stage, particularly when 574 crates of foreign liquor has been misappropriated. 12. In view thereof, the prayer for quashing the impugned F.I.R is wholly misconceived at this stage and is therefore refused. 13. The instant writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. September 28, 2026 SFH CRLP No. 19240 of 2026 3 (Devendra Singh-I,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHIM HUSAIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad