HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21624 of 2026 Court No. - 46 HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J. 1. Heard Mr. Aman Kumar Shukla, the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned A.G.A representing State/respondents 1, 2 & 3. 2. Perused the record. 3. Petitioners-Siddharth Sonkar @ Gulshan and 3 Others have approached this Court by means of present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the first informant report dated 25.03.2026 lodged by first informant/respondent-4, Mahendra Sonkar and registered as Case Crime No. 50 of 2026, under Section 351(3) BNS and Section 67 IT Act, Police Station-Kotwali City, District-Mirzapur. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners in challenge to the impugned F.I.R. dated 25.03.2026 submits that the petitioners are innocent. They have not committed the crime in question. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number. It is then contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that petitioner-1 was in love relationship with the daughter of first informant. Since petitioner-1 wanted to marry the daughter of first informant, therefore, the impugned FIR has been engineered to nip the aforesaid thought in the bud. On the above premise, the learned counsel for petitioners would thus submits that the impugned FIR is, therefore, liable to be quashed by this Court. 5. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State/respondents 1,2 and 3 has vehemently opposed the present writ petition. Learned A.G.A. submits that the submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioners, in challenge to the impugned FIR, relate to the disputed defence of petitioner, which cannot be examined at this stage. Furthermore, from Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aman Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Siddharth Sonkar @ Gulshan And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) perusal of impugned FIR, commission of a cognizable offence is clearly disclosed. As such, no interference is warranted by this Court in present writ petition. 6. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioners could not overcome the same. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioners, the learned A.G.A. for State/respondents 1, 2 & 3 and upon perusal of record, we find that the impugned FIR discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. Furthermore, from perusal of allegations made in the FIR, a prima-facie case is made out against petitioners. Since at this stage, only a prima-facie case is to be seen, we, therefore, decline to entertain present writ petition. 8. It is, accordingly, dismissed. 9. Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated. September 16, 2026 Vinay CRLP No. 21624 of 2026 2 (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad