Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RIZWAN KHAN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The High Court held that the application under Section 528 CrPC disclosed no ground for interference and therefore the chargesheet and proceedings cannot be quashed.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the chargesheet dated 25‑03‑2025, the cognizance and summoning order dated 19‑08‑2025, and the entire proceedings of case No. 72367 of 2025 relating to alleged offences under IPC sections 271, 278, 352 and 351(3). The High Court examined the FIR, the impugned order and the chargesheet and found no ground for interference, concluding that the application did not disclose any basis to set aside the proceedings. Consequently, the court refused the prayer to quash the chargesheet and ordered the applicants to surrender within 15 days and apply for bail, noting that no coercive action should be taken during that period. The court also directed that any bail application be decided expeditiously, citing the Supreme Court decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The application was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 CrPC for quashing a chargesheet and cognizance order is maintainable in the present facts.
  • Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to set aside the chargesheet, cognizance order and the entire criminal proceedings.
  • Whether the applicants are entitled to surrender and obtain bail pending trial.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Section 528 CrPC
  • quash of chargesheet
  • cognizance order
  • IPC sections 271, 278, 352, 351(3)
  • bail
  • Allahabad High Court

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32208 of 2026

Rizwan Khan And 3 Others
                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                        Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                     :   Sudhir Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                :   G.A.

Court No. - 79
                  HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for parties.

2. Present application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the
chargesheet dated 25.3.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated
19.8.2025 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C.,
Gorakhpur as well as entire proceedings of Case no. 72367 of 2025 (State of
U.P. vs. Rizwan Ahmad and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 131 of
2025, under Sections 271, 278, 352, 351(3) BNS against applicant no. 1 and
under sections 352, 351(3) BNS against applicant nos. 2 to 4, P.S.- Gulharia,
District Gorakhpur.

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, chargesheet and entire
proceeding, 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.

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
                                                                                            NA528 No. 32208 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    before the court concerned within a period of 15 days from today and apply
                                    for bail and if there is no other legal impediment before court concerned,
                                    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.



                                                                                         (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)
                                    September 8, 2026
                                    Shaswat




Digitally signed by :-
SHASWAT SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.