Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

JYOTI PRAKASH DUBEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court refused to quash the summons, the proceeding, and the non‑bailable warrants, holding that the prayer involved factual disputes and was not suitable for quashing.

Summary

The applicant, Jyoti Prakash Dubey, filed an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash a summons dated 07-10-2020, the entire criminal proceeding (S.T. No.12/2020) arising from a case registered in 2018 under Sections 354(Ka) and 506 of the IPC and Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act, and also to set aside non‑bailable warrants issued against him. He alleged that no offence was disclosed and that the prosecution was instituted with malafide intent to harass him, supporting his claim with certain documents and statements. The Court examined the materials and held that the prayer for quashing was not maintainable because the matters raised involved factual disputes and required appraisal of evidence. Consequently, the application for quashing was refused. However, the Court directed that the non‑bailable warrant be kept in abeyance for twenty days and that, if the applicant surrenders within that period and applies for bail, his bail plea will be considered. The application was thereafter disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing a summons, the entire proceeding, and non‑bailable warrants is maintainable when the contention involves factual disputes.
  • Whether the Court can stay a non‑bailable warrant pending surrender of the accused.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • quash
  • non‑bailable warrant
  • bail
  • Section 528
  • IPC
  • POCSO
  • factual dispute
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38584 of 2026

Jyoti Prakash Dubey
                                                .....Applicant(s)
                             Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                    .....Opposite
                                                          Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Ajai Kumar Srivastava, Juhi
                                Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 75
        HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for
the State and perused the material brought on record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been
filed praying for quashing of summoning order dated
07.10.2020 as well as entire proceeding of S.T. No. 12/2020,
State Vs. Jyoti Prakash Dubey, arising out of Case Crime No.
50 of 2018, under Sections 354(Ka), 506 I.P.C. and Section
9/10 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,
Police Station Kotwali Katra, District Mirzapur. Further prayer
has been made for quashing of non bailable warrants issued
against the applicant in the aforesaid trial.

3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no
offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present
prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for
the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain
documents and statements in support of his contention.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and
perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to
be a fit case praying for quashing. The prayer praying for
quashing is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised
by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes
and appraisal of evidence.

5. However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and
attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been
brought on record, it is directed that if the applicant appears
and surrenders before the court below within twenty days from
                                                                                         NA528 No. 38584 of 2026
                                                                 2


                                        today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be
                                        considered and decided in accordance with law.

                                        6. For a period of aforesaid twenty days from today, the non-
                                        bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in
                                        abeyance.

                                        7. The present application stands disposed of.

                                                                          (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)


                                        September 14, 2026
                                        Mustaqeem.




Digitally signed by :-
MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN
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.