Allahabad High Court
SUBHASH KUMAR RAM KRIPAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that there were no grounds to quash the chargesheet or the proceedings, and therefore dismissed the application.
Summary
The applicants Subhash Kumar, Ram Kripal and three others filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking the quash of a chargesheet dated 18‑04‑2024, the cognizance order dated 08‑04‑2025, and the entire proceedings of State v. Subhash Kumar (Case No. 652 of 2025) relating to offences under IPC Sections 323, 506 and 325. The High Court examined the FIR, the chargesheet and the injury report and concluded that no ground existed for interference or for setting aside the impugned order. Consequently, the court refused the prayer for quash. However, it directed that the applicants may surrender within 15 days and apply for bail, and that no coercive action be taken against them during that period, citing the Supreme Court decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can quash the chargesheet and cognizance order under Section 528 CrPC on the facts presented.
- Whether there exist sufficient grounds for interference with the proceedings of State v. Subhash Kumar.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 325, 506
Subjects
- Section 528 CrPC
- quash of chargesheet
- IPC offences
- bail application
- coercive action
- High Court jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15221 of 2026
Subhash Kumar Ram Kripal And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Patel,
Satya Prakash Rathor
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 77
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA
appearing for the State.
2. This application has been filed for seeking quashing of
chargesheet dated 18.04.2024 along with cognizance/summoning
order dated 08.04.2025 and entire proceeding of Case No.652 of
2025 (State Vs. Subhash Kumar and others), arising out of Case
Crime No.495 of 2023, under Sections 323, 506, 325 IPC, P.S.
Mauaima, District Prayagraj, pending in the court of learned
Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Prayagraj.
3. On perusal of the narration of FIR as well as impugned order
and chargesheet along with injury report, 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 applicants has submitted that liberty
may be granted to applicants to surrender before the court
concerned and apply for bail to which learned AGA has no
objection.
NA528 No. 15221 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 applicants surrender before the court concerned within a
period of 15 days from today and apply for bail, their 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 applicants herein in
pursuance of aforesaid case.
May 7, 2026
Vivek Kr.
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIVEK KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…