Allahabad High Court

ANKIT DWIVEDI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 22 April 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The High Court held that the magistrate correctly exercised jurisdiction under Section 528 B.N.S.S. and that a prima facie case was established, so the application to quash the charge sheet was refused.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. seeking to quash the charge sheet and the magistrate's cognizance order in a criminal case arising from a land‑dispute‑related assault alleged in FIR No. 583 of 2024. They contended that the allegations were false, the injuries were self‑inflicted, and the magistrate had not applied his mind, thus no prima facie case existed. The State opposed, arguing that the magistrate correctly examined the material and found a prima facie case, as required at the cognizance stage. The High Court examined the FIR, statements recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., and the charge sheet, and held that the magistrate’s finding of a prima facie offence was lawful and not perverse. Consequently, the court refused to set aside the cognizance order and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

Whether the learned magistrate erred in taking cognizance of the offences alleged in FIR No. 583 of 2024 under Section 528 B.N.S.S.
Whether the charge sheet and summons should be quashed on the ground that no prima facie case exists against the applicants
Whether the High Court can interfere with the magistrate’s factual findings at the stage of a Section 528 application

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 131, 180, 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 115, 351, 352, 452, 504, 506

Subjects

quashment of charge sheet
cognizance order
prima facie case
Section 528
land dispute
assault
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 46723 of 2025

Ankit Dwivedi And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Neeraj Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Sri Neeraj Pal, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Neel
Kant Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for
quashing the charge sheet dated 12.11.2024 along with
cognizance/summoning order dated 23.12.2024 passed by the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kanur Nagar as well as entire criminal proceeding of
Case No.156179 of 2025 (State Vs. Ankit Dwivedi & Others) arising out
of Case Crime No.583 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2),
351(3) and 131 B.N.S., Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that applicants have been
falsely implicated in the present case due to dispute between the parties
regarding the possession of land adjacent to the house of applicants,
which was purchased by them through registered sale deed in 2018. Being
aggrieved of the said sale deed of the land in dispute, the wife of opposite
party No.2 filed Civil Suit No.417 of 2020 against the applicants and his
father for cancellation of the sale deed and permanent injunction before
the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) Kanpur Nagar. He further submitted that
opposite party No.2 had earlier also lodged an F.I.R. dated 24.8.2020 as
Case Crime No.608/2020 under Sections 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police
Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, with allegations that applicants
are entered his filed, assaulted and abusing him and his family members.
He further submitted that the opposite party No.2 lodged another F.I.R as
Case Crime No.583 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3)
NA528 No. 46723 of 2025
2

and 131 B.N.S., at Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar with the
allegations that on 08.09.2024 at about 9:30 a.m., the applicants entered
his field and started abusing and assaulting opposite party No. 2 and Amit
Dwivedi with lathi-danda, resulting injuries. He further submitted that the
injuries are simple in nature and are self inflicted. After investigation,
charge sheet was filed against the applicants. Thereafter, the learned
Magistrate took cognizance vide order dated 23.12.2024. He is further
submitted that no offence is made out against the applicants and the said
cognizance order was passed without proper application of mind.
Therefore, the impugned order and charge sheet are liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the submissions
advanced on behalf of the applicants and contended that the learned
Magistrate has passed the impugned cognizance order strictly in
accordance with law. It is submitted that, at the stage of taking
cognizance, the Court is only required to examine whether a prima facie
case is made out or not. He further submits that the charge sheet has been
filed after due investigation and the material collected therein clearly
discloses the commission of offences against the applicants. There is no
illegality, irregularity, or perversity in the impugned order passed by the
learned Magistrate. Therefore, the present application is liable to be
dismissed.

5. As per the facts of this case, it transpires that opposite party no. 2
lodged a First Information Report, Case Crime No.583 of 2024, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 131 B.N.S., Police Station
Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar against the applicants with the allegations
that applicants abused and assaulted opposite party No.2 and Amit
Dwivedi. It is an admitted fact that opposite party No.2 and his brother
(Amit Dwivedi) sustained injuries, which were found simple in nature.
The statement of opposite party No.2, injured-Amit Dwivedi and other
witnesses were recorded under Sections 180 B.N.S.S. and thereafter, the
Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicants. The
learned Magistrate, upon perusal of the police report and the material
brought on record, formed an opinion that a prime facie offence is made
out against the applicants and summoned the applicants under vide order
dated 23.12.2024.
NA528 No. 46723 of 2025
3

6. 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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed
question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in
exercise of power conferred under Section 528 B.N.S.S.

7. Upon consideration of the material available on record, this Court finds
that the learned Magistrate has proceeded in accordance with law. This
Court does not find any illegality or perversity in passing the
cognizance/summoning order. Therefore, the prayer for setting aside the
same is hereby refused.

8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
April 23, 2026
Md Faisal

Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…