Allahabad High Court
AMIT @ TENIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The application for quashing the orders is dismissed; the orders stand.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the cognizance order, bailable warrant and non‑bailable warrant dated 4 March 2025 issued by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat, in S.S.T. No. 82 of 2011 (State of U.P. vs. Bhupendra). The High Court examined the record and found no ground for interference with the impugned orders. Consequently, the court refused the prayer for quashing and directed the applicant to surrender before the concerned court within fifteen days, with a stay on any coercive action during that period. The court noted that the applicant had already been granted bail, so no fresh bond or surety was required. The application was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the cognizance order, bailable warrant and non‑bailable warrant dated 4 March 2025 can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- Section 528 CrPC
- quash petition
- cognizance order
- bailable warrant
- non‑bailable warrant
- criminal procedure
- surrender
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14204 of 2026
Amit @ Teni
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : J C Vijay Singh, Yadavendra Dwivedi
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
cognizance/summoning order dated 17.2.2024, Bailable Warrant and Non-
Bailable Warrant dated 4.3.2025 passed by learned Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat and entire proceeding of S.S.T no. 82 of 2011
(State of U.P. vs. Bhupendra and others) (arising out of Case Crime no. 384
of 2011) under sections 392 IPC, PS- Ghatampur, District Kanpur Dehat.
3. On perusal of the record, 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
entire proceeding, 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 in pursuance to
NBW order to which learned AGA has no objection.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the matter, applicant is
directed to appear before the learned court concerned in pursuance to
impugned NBW order within 15 days from today. Till 15 days from today,
no coercive action shall be initiated against the applicant. After the expiry of
NA528 No. 14204 of 2026
2
aforesaid period of 15 days, learned concerned court is directed to proceed
as per law. It is also informed by learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant has already been granted bail and as such no fresh bond and surety
will be required by the learned court concerned.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
May 7, 2026
Shaswat
Digitally signed by :-
SHASWAT SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…