Allahabad High Court
CRLP/10759/2025 of BABLU AND ANOTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME DEPTT. U.P. GOVT. LKO. AND OTHERS on 18 November 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10759 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 1 to 3. 2. No notice need be issued to the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10759 of 2025
Court No. - 11
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
HON'BLE MRS. BABITA RANI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
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 petitioners and learned AGA appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 1 to 3.
2. No notice need be issued to the respondent no. 4 taking into consideration the nature of order proposed to be passed.
3. Instant writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the First Information Report dated 19.10.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 0385 of 2025 under Sections 115 (2), 352, 351 (3), 316 (2), 127 (2), 324 (2), 74 & 64 of B.N.S, 2023 at Police Station- Sandhana District- Sitapur, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition. Subsequent thereto, Sections 64 & 74 of B.N.S, 2023 have also been added.
4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioner had only introduced the buyer and seller of the property which transaction subsequently turned bad.
5. A threat has been extended to the petitioners to refund the money and the petitioner no. 1 was also ready to refund the same but subsequent thereto, the impugned First Information Report has been lodged against the aforesaid provisions of law.
6. It is contended that although no offence as provided under Section 64 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Tribhuvan Narai Singh, Satendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Bablu And Anothers .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
of the B.N.S, 2023 was made out in the initial First Information Report lodged by the complainant but subsequent thereto, in a statement, the complainant has given a statement which is contrary to what has been indicated in the First Information Report.
7. Contention is that even if for the sake of argument and the allegations as made in the said First Information Report can be said to be made out against the petitioner no. 1 but at no stretch of imagination can be said to be made against the petitioner no. 2.
8. On the other hand, learned AGA states that the investigation is still going on.
9. Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents-authorities not to take any coercive action against the petitioners till any credible/cogent evidence is found against them.
10. Needless to mention that the petitioners shall cooperate in the investigation. In case of non cooperation then the benefit of this order shall not be available to the petitioners. November 18, 2025 Pachhere/- CRLP No. 10759 of 2025 2 (Mrs. Babita Rani,J.) (Abdul Moin,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench