Allahabad High Court
/11027/2025 of ANUJ KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS on 27 November 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11027 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, 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
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11027 of 2025
Court No. - 30
HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J.
HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
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 FIR No. 385 of 2025, under Sections 74, 78, 308(5), 351(3) of BNS, Police Station Bhira, District Kheri.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the allegations made in the First Information Report, prima facie no offence whatsoever is disclosed against the petitioner and as such, the impugned first information report is liable to be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State has submitted that from the allegations made in the First Information Report, prima facie offence is clearly disclosed against the petitioner, therefore, the impugned First Information Report can not be quashed in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 and in a recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 843 of 2024, Directorate Enforcement Vs. Niraj Tyagi and others.
5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations made in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Anuj Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
the First Information Report and the relevant law cited by learned AGA for the State and the fact that impugned First Information Report discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that the impugned First Information Report can not be quashed, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned First Information Report is refused.
6. However in case, the petitioner files an application for anticipatory/regular bail before the appropriate court, his bail application shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is finally disposed of. November 27, kkv/ CRLP No. 11027 of 2025
(Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Rajiv Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench