HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6509 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J. 1. Case called out in revised list. 2. Even though, name of Mr. Harendra Yadav is duly published in the cause list as counsel for petitioners but neither he nor anyone on his behalf is present to press the present writ petition, even in the revised call. 3. Learned AGA for State-respondents 1 & 2 is present. 4. Petitioners-Sachin Kumar Chaurasiya and Laxmi Devi Maurya have approached this Court by means of present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the impugned FIR dated 20.03.2025 lodged by first informant-respondent-3, Vikram Singh and registered as Case Crime No. 0183 of 2025, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Karvi Kotwali Nagar, District-Chitrakoot. 5. Present writ petition came up for admission on 08.04.2025 and this Court passed the following order;- "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and 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.0183 of 2025, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Karvi Kotwali Nagar, District-Chitrakoot. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioners in the aforesaid case. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Harendra Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sachin Kumar Chaurasiya And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He submitted that with the same allegations, as has been levelled in the impugned FIR, respondent no.3 has already initiated a proceedings under Section 138 of N.I. Act. In this backdrop, he submitted that for the same cause of action two criminal proceedings cannot be allowed and the same is abuse of process of law. At last, he contended that the petitioners have no criminal history. 4. The matter requires consideration. 5. Issue notice to respondent no.3 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. 6. All the respondents may file counter affidavit within six weeks. Petitioners will have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. 7. List thereafter. 8. Till the next date of listing, or till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. (now Section 193(3) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioners pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. subject to their co-operation in the ongoing investigation." 6. Aforesaid interim order dated 08.04.2025 was not extended further. As such, on date no interim order is operating in the present writ petition. 7. Considering the fact that the FIR impugned in the present writ petition was lodged on 20.03.2025, a period of more than one year and 6 months has expired since then and no interim order is operating in the present writ petition. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that by efflux of time, present writ petition has been rendered infructuous. 8. It is, accordingly, dismissed as having rendered infructuous. 9. Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated. October 9, 2026 Vinay CRLP No. 6509 of 2025 2 (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad