Allahabad High Court
RAHI SINGH @ ARJUN SINGH AND ANOTHERversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court did not quash the proceedings but disposed the Section 528 application, allowing the applicants to file a discharge application to be decided per applicable law.
Summary
The applicants filed a Section 528 CrPC application seeking to quash the Special Session Trial and charge sheet relating to offences under Sections 366, 504, 506, 120B IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The victim was missing, prompting a habeas corpus petition, after which the High Court directed the CBI to investigate solely for the recovery of the victim’s corpus. The CBI could not recover the corpus and submitted a final report limited to that mandate, while the police proceeded to file a charge sheet. The applicants sought permission to file a discharge application and asked the court to consider both the police report and the CBI’s final report in line with Supreme Court precedents. The Court declined to quash the proceedings, disposed the Section 528 application, and granted the applicants liberty to file a discharge application, which will be decided according to the law laid down in Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali and Luckose Zachariah v. Joseph Joseph.
Issues considered
- Whether the Special Session Trial and charge sheet can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC given the limited scope of the CBI investigation.
- Whether the applicants are entitled to file a discharge application and have the CBI’s final report considered alongside the police charge sheet.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 366, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- quash
- Section 528 CrPC
- CBI investigation
- corpus recovery
- discharge application
- SC/ST Act
- criminal trial
- habeas corpus
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16760 of 2026
Rahi Singh @ Arjun Singh And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation And 2 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rahul Srivastava
Court No. - 73
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. This application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire
proceedings of Special Session Trial No.127 of 2022, State of U.P. Vs.
Happy Singh @ Shiv Pratap Singh and others, as well as charge sheet
dated 21.2.2022 along with cognizance order dated 24.2.2022 in Case
Crime No.232 of 2021, under Sections 366, 504, 506, 120B I.P.C. and
Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Police Station Kalyanpur, District
Fatehpur pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge,
S.C./S.T. Act, Fatehpur.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that initially a first
information report was lodged against the applicants under Sections 366,
504, 506, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act. The
victim was missing, as a result of the same, a habeas corpus petition was
filed wherein this Court by order dated 5.2.2024 directed the C.B.I. to
investigate the matter and to recover the corpus and submit its report. The
C.B.I. investigated the matter on the mandate of recovery of the corpus
and thereafter, submitted its report before the trial court. As per the C.B.I.,
the corpus could not be recovered and, therefore, a final report has been
submitted. The police has submitted a charge sheet against the applicant
and, therefore, the effect of the final report submitted by C.B.I. is required
to be considered by the court concerned.
3. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. submits that the investigation of the
C.B.I. was to the extent of recovery of the corpus as has been directed by
NA528 No. 16760 of 2026
2
this Court by order dated 5.2.2024 and the merits of the investigation has
not been touched upon by C.B.I.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submits that he may be
permitted to file a discharge application before the court concerned and
the court concerned may be directed to consider the police report as well
as final report in terms of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the case
of Vinay Tyagi Vs. Irshad Ali alias Deepak and others, 2013 (5) SCC
762 and Luckose Zachariah @ Zak Nedumchira Luke and others Vs.
Joseph Joseph and others, 2022 (120) ACC 299.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present
application is disposed of with liberty to the applicants to file discharge
application before the court concerned. In the event discharge application
is filed, the same shall be decided in accordance with law and in terms of
the law laid down by Supreme Court in the cases of Vinay Tyagi Vs.
Irshad Ali alias Deepak and others (supra) and Luckose Zachariah @
Zak Nedumchira Luke and others Vs. Joseph Joseph and others after
hearing all the parties concerned.
(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
May 6, 2026
Bhaskar
Digitally signed by :-
BHASKAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…