Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

VISHNU SIKARWAR @ SHISHUPAL SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The Court held that the existence of a prima facie case precludes quashing, and therefore declined to set aside the summoning order or the proceedings.

Summary

The petitioners, Vishnu Sikarwar and another, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash a summoning order dated 24‑07‑2024 and the entire criminal proceedings (Complaint No. 16636 of 2023) under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act pending before the Fast‑Track Court, Agra. The High Court examined the material and observed that, at this stage, a prima facie case of offence appears to exist and the disputes are factual, which cannot be decided by the Court. The power to quash under Section 528 is exercisable only where there is a failure of justice or abuse of process, which was not found. Consequently, the petition to quash was declined. The Court directed that if the petitioners are not on bail they may apply for bail within 45 days, and any discharge application must be decided by the trial court within six weeks, with no coercive measures to be taken during that period. The application was therefore disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can quash the summoning order and the criminal proceedings under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that no offence is made out.
  • Whether there is a failure of justice or abuse of process warranting the exercise of the power to quash.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Section 528
  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • Section 498A
  • Domestic Violence Act
  • bail
  • procedural abuse
  • High Court
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38764 of 2026

Vishnu Sikarwar @ Shishupal Singh And Another
                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                          :   Pankaj Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                     :   G.A.

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

1. Heard Mr. Pankaj Dwivedi, 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 quash the summoning order dated 24.07.2024 passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate / Fast Track court no. 1 Agra as well as entire criminal
proceedings of Complaint case no. 16636 of 2023 Under Section 498A, IPC
and Section 4 of D.P. Act Police Station Mahila Thana District Agra,
pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate / Fast Track Court no. 1 Agra.

3. 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.

4. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

5. 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 makes 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.
                                                                                             NA528 No. 38764 of 2026
                                                                        2


                                    6. 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.

                                    7. 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.

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



                                                                                        (Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
                                    September 14, 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.