Allahabad High Court
PARVEZ AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with no interference in the charge‑sheet proceedings.
Summary
Petitioners Parvez and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 12‑03‑2026 registered under Sections 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023. The State argued that the investigation was complete, a charge‑sheet had been filed under Section 193(3) of the BNS and that the correct remedy was an application under Section 528 of the BNS, not a writ. Petitioners, after hearing the State’s objection, sought to withdraw the petition. The Court, noting the lack of any objection to the withdrawal, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn and vacated any interim order. No substantive merits of the FIR were examined.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR is maintainable after a charge‑sheet has been filed.
- Whether the appropriate remedy is an application under Section 528 of the BNS rather than a writ.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 115(2), 193(3), 210, 351(3), 352, 528
Subjects
- criminal writ petition
- FIR
- charge sheet
- Section 528
- writ jurisdiction
- withdrawal
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9733 of 2026
Parvez And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kaushlendra Pandey, Shyam Shankar
Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Amar Singh Yadav, G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Shyam Shankar Mishra, the learned counsel for petitioners;
the learned A.G.A. for State respondents 1 & 2; and Mr. Amar Singh
Yadav, the learned counsel representing first informant/respondent no.3.
2. Perused the record
3. Petitioner- Parvez and 2 others have approached this Court by means of
present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated 12.03.2026
lodged by first informant-respondent-3, Arsalan and registered as Case
Crime No. 74 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of BNS, 2023,
Police Station-Shahganj, District-Jaunpur.
4. On the matter being taken up, the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1
and 2 submits that after completion of statutory investigation of concerned
case crime number in terms of Chapter XIII BNSS, Investigating Officer has
forwarded the charge sheet/police report in terms of Section 193(3) BNSS.
On the above premise, the learned AGA contends that remedy now lies to
petitioner to approach this Court by means of an application under Section
528 BNSS challenging the aforementioned charge sheet/police report as well
as the cognizance taking order/summoning order to be passed by Jurisdiction
Magistrate in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 210 BNSS. As such no
interference is warranted by this court in present writ petition.
5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioners
submits that in view of the objection raised by the learned AGA in
CRLP No. 9733 of 2026
2
opposition to present writ petition, instant writ petition be dismissed as
withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.
6. Learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel
representing first informant respondent-3 have no objection to the aforesaid
prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioners.
7. In view of above the prayer prayed for by means of present writ
petition is hereby refused.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioners, the learned AGA for
State respondents, upon perusal of record and considering the rival
submissions urged by the learned counsel for the parties as noted
hereinabove, the present writ petition shall stand dismissed as withdrawn
with liberty aforesaid.
9. Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated.
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
May 7, 2026
A.N. Mishra
Digitally signed by :-
AMARNATH MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…