JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The challenge in this petition is made to FIR No.269 of 2023, dated 28.11.2023, under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Pulbhatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the FIR, certain meat shop owners within the local limits of Nagar Palika Kiccha were operating their valid license. Their licenses were examined; it was found that they were not genuine. Those shop keepers revealed it to the Nagar Palika officers that the petitioner had provided them license after taking money. The FIR has been lodged by the Executive Officer of the Nagar Palika. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the licenses were validly given to the shopkeepers; they were not forged. 5. This is writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If FIR discloses commission of offences, generally no interference is warranted unless there are compelling circumstances to do so. 6. It is not the case that any shopkeeper had made complaint. It is the Nagar Palika Parishad, who examined those licenses and found them forged. The shopkeepers revealed that it is the petitioner, who provided the forged licenses for money. What is the role of the petitioner that will fall for scrutiny during investigation or trial, as the case may be. In this proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court cannot examine the validity or authenticity of the licenses, which were given to those shopkeepers, who are named in the FIR or other shopkeepers. It will find scrutiny during investigation or trial, as the case may be. Therefore, there is no reason to make any interference in this petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself. 7. The petition is dismissed in limine.