Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

DINESH NAYAK AND 10 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the material on record does not show a failure of justice or abuse of process, and therefore the charge sheet cannot be quashed under Section 528.

Summary

The applicants, Dinesh Nayak and others, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 12‑02‑2026 and the subsequent trial in Case No. 391 of 2026, alleging that the alleged offences arose from mob violence and that the injuries were minor. The State opposed the application. The Court examined the material and observed that the factual disputes raised by the applicants could not be resolved at this interlocutory stage and that the record did not demonstrate that no offence was made out. It held that the power to quash under Section 528 is to be exercised only where there is a clear failure of justice or abuse of process, which was not evident here. Consequently, the Court declined the prayer to quash the charge sheet and disposed of the application, while directing that the applicants may apply for bail or discharge within specified time‑frames.

Issues considered

  • Whether the charge sheet and the proceeding can be quashed under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the ground of lack of offence or abuse of process.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Section 528
  • quash charge sheet
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • abuse of process
  • bail
  • trial court
  • mob violence

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37730 of 2026

Dinesh Nayak And 10 Others
                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Ashok          Kumar    Chaudhary,     Rajeev
                                Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Sri Rajeev Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to allow this application and to quash the charge sheet dated
12.02.2026 as well as to quash the further proceeding of Case No. 391 of
2026 (State Vs. Nandpal and others) in Case Crime No. 123 of 2025 under
Sections 121(1), 132, 191(2), 217, 324(2), 352, 351(3), B.N.S., Police
Station Saurikh, District Kannauj.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the alleged incident
took place during mob violence. As per the statement of the doctor,
injuries were minor and fresh, caused by hard and blunt object and simple
in nature.

4. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the
case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the
applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed
questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in
cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of
procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to
secure the ends of justice.

5. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.
                                                                                              NA528 No. 37730 of 2026
                                                                        2


                                    6. In case, the applicants are not on bail, it is directed that if the applicants
                                    appear or surrender through counsel before the Trial Court and make an
                                    application for bail within 45 days from the date of the order, the same shall
                                    be considered and disposed of expeditiously, after giving opportunity to the
                                    other side.

                                    7. Further, it is provided that in case the applicants move an application for
                                    discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel, the same shall be disposed
                                    of by the Trial Court by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with
                                    law within six weeks thereafter.

                                    8. For a period of 45 days or till the disposal of the discharge application,
                                    whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the
                                    applicants in the aforesaid case.

                                    9. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.



                                                                                        (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
                                    September 23, 2026
                                    Puspendra




Digitally signed by :-
PUSPENDRA NARAYAN 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.