JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri. Prashant Chandra Senior Advocate assisted by Sri. Anshuman Singh Advocate, the learned Counsel for the applicants, Sri. Amit Kumar Dwivedi, the learned A.G.A. and Sri. Avinash Chandra, the learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of F.I.R. No. 39 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 427, 323, 504, 506 and 34 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki.

3. The learned A.G.A. and the learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 raised a preliminary objection that the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable for quashing of the F.I.R. in view of the law laid down by a Bench consisting of seven Hon’ble Judges of this Court in Ramlal Yadava versus State of U.P. (1989) 1 MWN (Cr.) 198 All (FB).

4. Sri. Prashant Chandra, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant submitted that a First Information Report can be questioned and set aside in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. which preserve the inherent powers of the High Court’s to prevent abuse of the process of court. The availability of extraordinary remed