Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SANJAY KUMAR SHASHTRI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The application is dismissed as not pressed.

Summary

The applicants, Sanjay Kumar Shashtri and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking execution of a decree. During the hearing, counsel for the applicants informed the court that they no longer wished to pursue the application because possession of the property had already been delivered to them. The State, represented by G.A., was present through an AGA. The court noted the applicants’ request to withdraw and, finding no further cause to proceed, dismissed the application as not pressed. No substantive merits of the original claim were examined. The order was pronounced by Hon'ble Justice Nand Prabha Shukla on 23 September 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether the application under Section 528 CrPC should proceed when the applicants voluntarily withdraw it after possession has been delivered.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Section 528 CrPC
  • possession
  • withdrawal of application
  • execution of decree
  • civil procedure

Judgment

                                                      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                                         APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34857 of 2026

                                    Sanjay Kumar Shashtri And Another
                                                                                                   .....Applicant(s)
                                                                            Versus

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

                                    Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Harsha Pandey, Harshit Pandey,
                                                                    Monika Pathak, Munna Pandey
                                    Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

                                    Court No. - 80
                                                          HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

                                    1. Heard Mr. Devesh Kumar Pandey, holding brief of Mr. Munna Pandey,
                                    learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

                                    2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press
                                    the present application as possession has been delivered to the applicants.

                                    3. In view of the above, the present application is dismissed as not pressed.


                                                                                         (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
                                    September 23, 2026
                                    Aditya Tripathi




Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
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.