Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RAJEEV URF SANJEEV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The High Court declined to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order, finding no failure of justice or abuse of process.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 17‑03‑2025 and the cognizance and summoning order dated 26‑11‑2025 in Criminal Case No. 2516 of 2025, which alleged offences under Sections 333, 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS. The High Court examined the material and observed that the dispute centred on questions of fact and that no clear failure of justice or abuse of process was evident. Consequently, the Court declined the prayer to quash the charge sheet and cognizance order. The Court directed that if the applicants are not on bail, they may appear or surrender through counsel and apply for bail within 45 days, and that any discharge application should be decided by the trial court within six weeks. For a period of 45 days or until the discharge application is disposed of, no coercive measures may be taken against the applicants. The application was therefore disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can quash the charge sheet and cognizance order under Section 528 BNSS in the absence of a demonstrable failure of justice or abuse of process
  • Whether the applicants are entitled to relief regarding bail and discharge pending trial

Legislation cited

  • BNS — s. 115(2), 333, 351(2), 352
  • BNSS — s. 528

Subjects

  • Section 528
  • quash of charge sheet
  • cognizance order
  • bail application
  • discharge application
  • criminal procedure
  • abuse of process

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

            APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13780 of 2026

Rajeev Urf Sanjeev And Another
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                    .....Opposite
                                                                          Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Raj Kumar Dubey, Subhash Chandra
                                Dubey, Sudha Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 80
                 HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to allow this application and to quash the charge sheet dated
17.03.2025 as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 26.11.2025
passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No 5, District
- Bareilly, including the further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2516 of
2025 (State Vs. Rajeev urf Sanjeev and Others) arising out of Case Crime
No. 459 of 2024 under Sections 333, 115(2), 352 & 351(2) of BNS, Police
Station Collector Bukganj, District-Bareilly pending in the Court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist Bareilly.

3. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the
case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the
applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed
questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in
cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of
procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to
secure the ends of justice.

4. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

5. In case, the applicants are not on bail, it is directed that if the applicants
appear or surrender through counsel before the Trial Court and make an
application for bail within 45 days from the date of the order, the same shall
                                                                                             NA528 No. 13780 of 2026
                                                                       2


                                    be considered and disposed of expeditiously, after giving opportunity to the
                                    other side.

                                    6. Further, it is provided that in case the applicants move an application for
                                    discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel, the same shall be disposed
                                    of by the Trial Court by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with
                                    law within six weeks thereafter.

                                    7. For a period of 45 days or till the disposal of the discharge application,
                                    whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the
                                    applicants in the aforesaid case.

                                    8. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.

                                    September 23, 2026
                                    Puspendra
                                                                                        (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.