Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

DINESH KUMAR SURYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the applicant's lack of clean hands precludes the exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the criminal proceedings.

Summary

The applicant, Dinesh Kumar Surya, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No.1925 of 2026) initiated by the State of U.P. under Sections 324(4) and 318(4) of the BNS. The High Court examined the charge‑sheet and cognizance order and noted that the applicant had a prior criminal history, which he failed to disclose as a clean‑hands claim. Relying on Supreme Court precedents (S.B. Noronah v. Union of India and M/s Tomorrowland Ltd. v. HUDCO), the Court held that relief cannot be granted to a litigant who does not approach the Court with clean hands. Consequently, the Court found no basis to invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the proceedings. The application was dismissed and the trial court was directed to continue the trial expeditiously.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the charge‑sheet and criminal proceedings.
  • Whether the applicant's failure to demonstrate clean hands, given his existing criminal history, bars the grant of relief.

Legislation cited

  • BNS — s. 318(4), 324(4)
  • BNSS — s. 528

Subjects

  • criminal procedure
  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • clean hands doctrine
  • Section 528 BNSS
  • inherent jurisdiction
  • charge sheet
  • cognizance order

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33223 of 2026

Dinesh Kumar Surya
                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                        Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)              :   Bal Mukund Singh, Surya Dev
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)         :   G.A., Yashasvi Shukla

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

1. This matter has been taken up in the date fixed category.

2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and Sri
Yashasvi Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

3. The present application under Section 528 BNSS, has been filed for
quashing the entire proceedings of Case No.1925 of 2026 (State vs. Dinesh
Kumar Surya) arising out of Case Crime No.13 of 2026, under Sections
324(4), 318(4) BNS, Police Station- Baherhi, District- Bareilly, pending
before learned court of Judicial Magistrate, Baherhi, Bareilly, including
charge sheet dated 10.04.2026 and cognizance/summoning order dated
16.05.2026.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record, including the
impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order.

5. In compliance to earlier order dated 15.09.2026, learned AGA came up
with the instructions and submitted that there is one case of criminal history
credited against the applicant, but at the time of filing instant application,
applicant has not averred in para-20 of the affidavit that there is no criminal
history of applicant, meaning thereby applicant has not come up with clean
hands and as such no interference is required by this Court, since in catena
of judgments rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court such as in case of
S.B.Noronah vs. Union of India reported in AIR Online 1994 SC 124 as
well as in case of M/s Tomorrowland Limited vs. Housing and Urban
Development Corporation Limited and another reported in [2025] 2
                                                                                          NA528 No. 33223 of 2026
                                                                   2


                                    S.C.R 998, it has been held that no indulgence or relief would be granted in
                                    favour of any litigant who has not approached to the Court with 'clean
                                    hands'.

                                    6. Accordingly, this Court does not find any good ground to invoke its
                                    inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS for quashing the impugned
                                    charge-sheet, cognizance/summoning or the consequential criminal
                                    proceedings and as such, the present application is hereby dismissed.

                                    7. Learned trial court concerned shall proceed with the trial expeditiously,
                                    strictly in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observation
                                    made herein.

                                    September 29, 2026
                                    Saif
                                                                                       (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN
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.