HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5575 of 2026 Court No. - 49 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard Mohd Salman, the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned AGA for State respondent nos. 1 & 2 and Sri Akhlendra Pratap Singh representing first informant-respondent 3. 2. Perused the record. 3. Petitioner Smt. Parwati Prajapati @ Parwati Devi and three others have approached this Court by means of present Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 22.02.2026 lodged by first informant respondent 3 Sri Shakti Prakash and registered as Case Crime No. 43 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi. 4. At the very outset, the learned AGA representing State respondents 1 and 2 submits that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 02.02.2026, a prompt FIR dated 03.02.2026 was lodged by the first informant Smt. Parwati Prajapati petitioner no. 1 herein and registered as Case Crime No. 0021 of 2026 under Sections 191(2), 115(2) and 352 B.N.S., Police Station-Karari, District-Kaushambi. In the aforesaid FIR, the time of occurrence is shown at 19:00 hours. As many as five persons namely Lallu, Shiv Mahima, Shesh Rai, Anshu and wife of Lallu have been nominated as named accused in the aforesaid FIR. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd Salman Counsel for Respondent(s) : Akhlendra Pratap Singh, Deleep Kumar Chaudhari, G.A. Parwati Prajapati @ Parwati Devi And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. In respect of the same incident, another FIR dated 22.02.2026 was lodged by the first informant respondent no. 3 Sri Shakti Prakash and was registered as Case Crime No. 0043 of 2026 under Section 115(2), 352, 351(3) 3(1)(Dha) and 3(2)(va) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi. In the aforesaid FIR also, the time of occurrence is mentioned at 19:00 hours. As many as four persons namely Parwati Prajapati, Muneem, Jhodhi and wife of Jhodhi have been nominated as named accused in the aforesaid FIR. 6. On the above premise, the learned AGA representing State respondent nos. 1 and 2 submits that there are cross FIRs from both the sides. As such the incident is admitted to the parties. In view of above, the primary question to be answered as to who is the aggressor. The said question cannot be answered in isolation of petitioner. In view of above, no interference is warranted by this Court in present writ petition. 7. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for the petitioners could not overcome the same. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned AGA representing State respondent nos. 1 & 2 and upon perusal of record, we find that the objections raised by learned AGA in opposition to present writ petition are clearly borne out from the record. Furthermore, the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for the petitioners with reference to the record. 9. In view of above, the writ petition fails and liable to be dismissed. 10. It is accordingly dismissed. 11. Interim order if any shall stands vacated. April 20, 2026 Arif CRLP No. 5575 of 2026 2 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad