HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5120 of 2026 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ajit Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2,3 and Mr. Prarabha Jain, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Veerendra Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant respondent 4. 2. Perused the record. 3. Petitioner Vikrant Thakur has approached this court by means of present Crl. Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 08.02.2026 lodged by first informant respondent 4 Pradeep Rana and registered as Case Crime No. 0026 of 2026, under Sections 103(1), 333, 109(1), 3(5) BNS, Police Station Biharigarh, District Saharanpur. 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2 and 3 raised an objection by contending therein that the impugned FIR has also been lodged under Section 103(1) BNS i.e. 302 IPC. It is then contended by the learned A.G.A. that the innocence of the petitioner can not be inferred by this court as per the pleadings raised in the present writ petition. The FIR impugned in present writ petition discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, therefore no interference is warranted by this court in present writ petition. To buttress his submission the learned A.G.A. has invited the attention of Court to the order dated 19.02.2018 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 26757 of 2017, Prateek Garg v. State of U.P. and 2 others, wherein the Division Bench after taking into consideration the judgement passed by Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajeet Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Veerendra Singh Vikrant Thakur .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) the Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others, 2017 Law Suit (SC)23. It is urged by the learned A.G.A. that when the FIR impugned in present writ petition is examined in the light of parameters laid down by the Apex Court in aforementioned judgement, no case for quashing of FIR is made out. As such present writ petition is liable to be dismissed 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioner could not over come the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2,3, the learned counsel representing first informant respondent 4 and considering the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to the present writ petition as noted herein above we find that is same are clearly borne out from the record. In view of above, we decline to entertain the present writ petition. 7. As a result, the present writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed. 8. It is accordingly dismissed. March 18, 2026 RPD CRLP No. 5120 of 2026 2 (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad