Dismissed¶19

Dinesh Jain v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2026CRLP/3172/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 3172 of 2026 (Dinesh Jain v. State of U.P.), decided 25.02.2026 by Rajeev Misra and Lakshmi Kant Shukla, JJ. Petition challenging FIR dated 07.04.2025, Case Crime no. 07 of 2025, under Section 318(4) BNS and Section 66-D I.T Act, P.S. Cyber Crime Kannauj, dismissed as not maintainable: petitioner not named in FIR, hence no locus standi. Relied on Hukum Chand Garg (SC), Imran Khan and Prema Devi (Allahabad DB). Liberty preserved to seek bail or anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Since the petitioner is not named in the FIR, he has no locus standi to maintain the writ petition challenging the impugned FIR. ¶7

Dinesh Jain vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3172 of 2026

¶3

Dinesh Jain

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Chandan Yadav, Dipanshu Kushwaha
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 47

¶7

HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J.

¶8

Heard Mr. Dipanshu Kushwaha, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2 and 3.

¶9

2. Perused the record.

¶10

Petitioner Dinesh Jain has approached this court by means of present Crl. Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 07.04.2025, lodged by first informant/ respondent 4 Ankur Mishra and registerd as Case Crime no. 07 of 2025 under Section 318(4) BNS and section 66-D I.T Act, Police Station Cyber Crime Kannauj, District Kannauj.

¶11

At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2 and 3 has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of present writ petition. The learned A.G.A. submits that since petitioner is not named in the FIR, therefore, there is no locus with the petitioner to challenge the impugned FIR. In support of aforesaid submission, the learned A.G.A. has relied upon the order of Supreme Court as well as order passed by Division bench of this Court. The details of the same are as under: S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 762 of 2020 (Hukum Chand Garg and another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & others), Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 6048 of 2025 (Imran Khan Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) and Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7347 of 2025 (Prema Devi and another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others).

¶12

In view of above, the learned A.G.A thus submits that present writ

¶13

CRLP No. 3172 of 2026

¶14

¶15

petition is liable to be dismissed by this Court on the ground of maintainability.

¶16

When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioner over come the same.

¶17

Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2,3 and upon perusal of record we find that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Therefore, in view of above and also the law laid down by the Apex court as well as by this court as noted herein above, the petitioner has no locus to maintain the present writ petition challenging the impugned FIR.

¶18

In view of above, the present writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed on the ground of maintainability.

¶19

It is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.

¶20

However, this order shall not affect the right of petitioner to seek bail or anticipatory bail in concerned case crime no.

¶21

(Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)

¶22

February 25, 2026 RPD

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dinesh Jain v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Jain v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avnish Bhadauriya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Birendra Chaturvedi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep Soni and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharm Singh and Another vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Pradeep Soni and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Priyanshu Alias Golu vs the State of Up and 2 Others