Allahabad High Court
HEERALALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The application for quash of the chargesheet and proceedings is dismissed; no interference is warranted.
Summary
The applicant, Heeralal, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the chargesheet dated 16‑03‑2025, the cognizance and summoning order dated 28‑01‑2026, and the entire proceedings of State v. Heeralal (Case No. 114 of 2026) relating to offences under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 117(2) of the BNS Act. The High Court examined the FIR, the impugned order and the chargesheet and found no ground for interference or for setting aside the proceedings. Consequently, the court refused the prayer for quash and dismissed the application. However, the court directed that if the applicant surrenders within 15 days and applies for bail, the bail application should be decided expeditiously in line with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022). The court also ordered that no coercive action be taken against the applicant during the 15‑day period.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can quash the chargesheet and the entire proceeding under Section 528 CrPC.
- Whether there are sufficient grounds for interference with the cognizance and summoning order dated 28‑01‑2026.
- What direction, if any, should be given regarding bail and surrender of the applicant.
Legislation cited
- BNS Act — s. 115(2), 117(2), 351(3), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Subjects
- Section 528 CrPC
- quash of FIR
- chargesheet
- bail
- surrender
- High Court
- criminal procedure
- coercive action
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13935 of 2026
Heeralal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arun Kumar Pandey, Satwik
Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 77
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA
appearing for the State.
2. This present application has been filed for seeking quashing of
chargesheet dated 16.03.2025 along with cognizance/summoning
order dated 28.01.2026 and entire proceeding of Case No.114 of
2026 (State Vs. Heeralal), arising out of Case Crime No.36 of
2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2) BNS, P.S.
Aliganj, District Bareilly, pending in the court of learned Civil
Judge (J.D.)/ Judicial Magistrate-II, Anwla, Bareilly.
3. On perusal of the narration of FIR as well as impugned order
and chargesheet, this Court does not find it to be a case where
interference of this Court is required. No such ground appears to
be available in the present application, on the basis of which,
impugned order along with chargesheet and entire proceedings of
the said case, can be set aside.
4. Accordingly, the prayer sought through the instant application,
is refused.
5. Lastly, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that liberty
may be granted to applicant to surrender before the court
concerned and apply for bail to which learned AGA has no
objection.
NA528 No. 13935 of 2026
2
6. In view of the aforesaid, the instant application is finally
disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that in case,
the applicant surrenders before the court concerned within a
period of 15 days from today and applies for bail, his bail
application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in
accordance with law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar
Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022
SCC OnLine SC 825).
7. However, it is made clear that till 15 days from today, no
coercive action shall be taken against applicant herein in
pursuance of aforesaid case.
May 6, 2026
Vivek Kr.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIVEK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…