Allahabad High Court
SAMEEULLAHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Holding
The court refused to quash the non‑bailable warrant, holding that the application raised factual disputes requiring evidentiary appraisal and therefore could not be disposed of by quashing.
Summary
The applicant, Sameeullah, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash a non‑bailable warrant dated 29‑03‑2022 issued by the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge POCSO) in a case under IPC sections 363, 366 and POCSO Act sections 7 and 8. He alleged that no offence was disclosed against him and that the prosecution was instituted with malafide intent to harass him, supporting his claim with certain documents and statements. The High Court examined the materials and held that the matter involved factual disputes and an appraisal of evidence, making it unsuitable for quashing at this stage. Consequently, the court refused the prayer to quash the warrant but directed that the warrant be kept in abeyance for twenty days, allowing the applicant to surrender and apply for bail. The application was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the non‑bailable warrant issued in the POCSO case can be quashed under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Whether the applicant’s claim of malafide prosecution and lack of disclosed offence warrants dismissal of the warrant at the pre‑trial stage.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 7, 8
Subjects
- non‑bailable warrant
- quash
- Section 528
- POCSO
- bail
- malafide prosecution
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38614 of 2026
Sameeullah
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashutosh Mishra
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 non bailable warrant orders dated
29.03.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Room No. 1/ Special Judge (POCSO), Siddharth Nagar in
Special Criminal Case No. 54 of 2019 (State Vs. Sameeullah),
arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2019, under Sections 363,
366, I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of Protection of Children From
Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Itawa, District
Siddharthnagar.
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 of impugned order. The
prayer praying for quashing of same 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
today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be
NA528 No. 38614 of 2026
2
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
Checking your session…