Allahabad High Court

BHOLA SHUKLAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 22 April 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The application for quashing under Section 528 BNSS is dismissed as no ground to quash the proceedings exists.

Summary

The applicant, Bhola Shukla, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the summoning order dated 24.01.2020 and the charge sheet dated 27.12.2018 in a criminal case (Case No. 1585 of 2020) arising from FIR No. 503 of 2018 under Section 506 IPC. He alleged that the FIR was filed as a retaliatory measure after he lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC against airport employees, and contended that the investigating officer had not conducted a fair investigation and that no telephonic threat was made. The State, represented by G.A., argued that the FIR, the statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC, and the material collected established a prima facie case of criminal intimidation. The Court examined the applicable Supreme Court precedents on the power to quash proceedings and held that the dispute over facts and the defence of the applicant could not be decided at the interlocutory stage. Consequently, the Court found no ground to quash the case and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

Whether the proceeding under Section 528 BNSS can be quashed on the ground of lack of prima facie case.
Whether the investigation under Section 161 CrPC was fair and sufficient to sustain the charge sheet.
Whether the applicant's defence of non‑existence of any telephonic threat can be considered at the interlocutory stage.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 528
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3), 161
Indian Penal Code — s. 506

Subjects

quash
criminal procedure
Section 528 BNSS
prima facie case
investigation fairness
Section 506 IPC
charge sheet

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 43273 of 2025

Bhola Shukla
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

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

Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kamal
Dev Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The applicant filed this application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. to quash the
entire proceeding as well as summoning order dated 24.01.2020 and charge
sheet dated 27.12.2018 in Case No. 1585 of 2020 (State Vs. Bhola Shukla),
arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2018, under Section 506 I.P.C., Police
Station Phoolpur, District Varanasi, pending in the court of A.C.J.M. 4th,
District Varanasi.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
representative of M/s Shushila Trading Company and having a contract of
vehicle parking. His wife look-after the business. The opposite party no. 2 was
making illegal demand from him. When he denied, his tender was cancelled.
He filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the Airport
employees. Thereafter as counterblast, opposite party no. 2 lodged a first
information report as Case Crime No. 503 of 2018, under Section 506 I.P.C.,
Police Station Phoolpur, District Varanasi against the applicant with the
allegation that the applicant has threatened him for dire consequences by
making telephonic call. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the
applicant and the learned Magistrate took cognizance. He further submits that
the Investigating Officer has not conducted investigation fairly whereas no
case is made out against him as per evidence collected during investigation.
The applicant has not made any telephonic call to opposite party no. 2. There
is no evidence to prove this fact. All the allegations are false and frivolous and
general in nature. No case is made out against the applicant, therefore,
summoning order as well as charge sheet are liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the opposite party no. 2
NA528 No. 43273 of 2025
2

lodged a first information report as Case Crime No. 503 of 2018, under
Section 506 I.P.C., Police Station Phoolpur, District Varanasi against the
applicant with the allegation that he was threatened by the applicant for dire
consequences. During investigation, statement of the opposite party no. 2
under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein he supported the version of
the first information report. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted
and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance. He further submits that
from the perusal of the allegations made in the first information report and the
statements of the opposite party no. 2 and the material collected during the
course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the
applicant and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

5. As per facts of this case, opposite party no. 2 lodged a first information
report as Case Crime No. 503 of 2018, under Section 506 I.P.C. at Police
Station Phoolpur, District Varanasi against the applicant. During investigation,
his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded. After investigation,
charge sheet was filed against the applicant. Thereafter learned Magistrate
has taken cognizance.

6. From the perusal of material on record and the facts of the case, at this
stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All
the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed questions on fact,
which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred
under Section 528 B.N.S.S.. At this stage, only prima facie case to be
considered in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of
RP Kapoor Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1990 SC 66; State of Haryana Vs.
Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Criminal) 426; and State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma,
1992 SCC (Criminal) 192. The disputed defence of the applicants cannot be
considered at this stage.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any
ground to quash the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing
the same is hereby refused and the application is dismissed.

April 23, 2026
Rmk.
(Chawan Prakash,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…