Allahabad High Court
HARISHCHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SAURABH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
The Court held that the order dated 01‑07‑2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate is legally sound and therefore the application for quash is dismissed.
Summary
The applicant sought to quash the order dated 01‑07‑2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh, which had rejected his earlier application under Section 319 CrPC to summon a third accused, Harikesh, who had not been charge‑sheeted. The matter arose from an NCR filed in 2009 involving offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 325 IPC, for which a charge‑sheet was filed in 2011 and trial proceeded. The applicant argued that the magistrate’s order was illegal, unreasonable and unsupported by evidence, contending that Harikesh should have been summoned despite not being charge‑sheeted. The State opposed the quash petition and defended the magistrate’s reasoning. After hearing both sides, the High Court found no infirmity in the magistrate’s order, held the reasoning justified, and dismissed the application. Consequently, the order of 01‑07‑2025 stands.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate quashing the application under Section 319 CrPC is legally valid.
- Whether a person not charge‑sheeted can be summoned under Section 319 CrPC in the pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 155(2), 319, 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 325, 504, 506
Subjects
- quash order
- Section 319 CrPC
- criminal revision
- charge‑sheet
- summons of accused
- procedural law
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17207 of 2026
Harishchandra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harendra Prasad Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 77
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State.
2. The instant application has been preferred for seeking quashing of the
order dated 01.07.2025 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Azamgarh in Criminal Case No.1161 of 2013 (State Vs. Birju and Others)
arising out of NCR No.124 of 2009, under sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC,
P.S. Mubarakpur, District- Azamgarh.
3. Brief facts of the case is that initially an application u/s 155(2) Cr.P.C.
was preferred before learned Magistrate concerned for investigating an NCR
No.124 of 2009, under sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC, P.S. Mubarakur,
District- Azamgarh, which was allowed vide order dated 18.08.2009 and the
concerned Magistrate directed the concerned SHO to investigate the above
matter, wherein after conducting detail investigation concerned Investigating
Officer preferred charge-sheet on dated 12.08.2011 in pursuance to sections
325, 323, 504, 506 and thereafter trial was proceeded.
4. During trial, applicant preferred an application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. before
learned trial court with a prayer to summon one Harikesh/opposite party no.3
herein, who was not charge-sheeted during the course of investigation,
which was allowed vide order dated 11.10.2018 and the accused Harikesh
was summoned for facing trial; aggrieved with the above order, opposite
party no.3 preferred Criminal Revision No.160 of 2019 before this Court,
wherein co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order 13.09.2019 set-aside the
order dated 11.10.2018 and remanded the matter back to court below to pass
appropriate order in accordance with law in view of letter of Indian Army
dated 16.10.2018 referred to above after providing him sufficient
opportunity of hearing within two months from the date of production of
certified copy of this order.
NA528 No. 17207 of 2026
2
5. Thereafter, opposite party no.3 filed an objection on 06.11.2019 along
with order of this Court dated 13.09.2019 against his summoning before
learned trial court, which was further rejected vide order dated 05.12.2019;
aggrieved with the above order opposite party no.3 again preferred Criminal
Revision No.56 of 2020 before the learned Session Court, which was
allowed vide order dated 27.08.2021 and directed the court below to decide
the case after hearing both the parties and pass a lawful order.
6. Further, opposite party no.3 filed an objection along with order dated
27.08.2021 before learned trial court in Criminal Case No.1161 of 2013
(State vs. Birju and Others) arising out of NCR No.124 of 2009, but this
time learned court concerned rejected the application of applicant dated
04.04.2014 u/s 319 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 01.07.2025, which impugned
the instant application.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order dated
01.07.2025 passed by learned court concerned is illegal, unreasonable and
unjustified, since there was proper evidence against the accused Harikesh
during the course of investigation and even that he was not charge-sheeted
and this fact has not been considered by learned court concerned while
passing the impugned order, which is totally unjustified and without
application of mind and as such the impugned order is liable to be quashed
by this Court.
8. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through
instant application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for the
applicant and supported the impugned order dated 01.07.2025 passed by
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh.
9. After hearing rival submission extended by learned counsel for the parties
and upon consideration of aforesaid provisions, this Court finds that there is
hardly any infirmity in the order dated 01.07.2025, which impugned the
instant application, since the reasoning recorded by learned court concerned
is totally justified.
10. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed.
May 5, 2026
Saif
(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…