Allahabad High Court

TUSHAR PANDEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 15 April 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The application under Section 528 CrPC is dismissed as a prima facie case exists and the proceedings cannot be quashed at this stage.

Summary

The applicant, Tushar Pandey, filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the charge‑sheet and the cognizance order in a criminal case (Cr. No. 655 of 2023) filed under Sections 323 and 506 IPC for alleged assault and criminal intimidation. The applicant argued that there was no medical evidence, no independent witness and no CCTV footage, and therefore no prima facie case existed. The State contended that the FIR, statements recorded under Section 180 CrPC and the charge‑sheet established a prima facie offence. The High Court examined the material on record and held that the question of whether a prima facie case exists is a matter of fact that cannot be decided at the stage of a Section 528 application; the magistrate had correctly taken cognizance. Consequently, the Court found no ground to quash the proceedings and dismissed the application. The application under Section 528 was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 528 CrPC when a prima facie case appears to be made out on the basis of the FIR and charge‑sheet.
Whether the absence of medical evidence, independent witnesses, or CCTV footage defeats the existence of a prima facie offence under Sections 323 and 506 IPC.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 180, 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 506

Subjects

Section 528 CrPC
quash proceedings
prima facie case
assault
criminal intimidation
charge-sheet
cognizance order
High Court

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 46742 of 2025

Tushar Pandey
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anoop Shukla, Arya Suman Pandey,
Zafar Ahmad Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard Mr. Arya Suman Pandey, learned Counsel for applicant and learned
A.G.A. for State and perused the record.

2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant
with the following prayer:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to allow this application and Quash the entire
proceeding as well as well as charge-sheet dated 11.11.2022 as well as
cognizance/summoning order dated 10.07.2023 passed by the Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, 5th Allahabad, Prayagraj) in Criminal Case No.
655 of 2023, (State Versus Tushar Pandey) in Case Crime No. 272 of 2022,
Under Section 323, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Cantt, District Prayagraj,
which is pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 5th
Prayagraj."

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that opposite party no.2 lodged
a First Information Report on 21.09.2022 at 8:34 a.m. with an allegation that
while she was walking in her lawn, the applicant came there and started
assaulting her with fists and kicks but there is no medical examination to
prove the injuries. There is no independent witness in this case. The
investigating Officer has not collected the CCTV footage of the area. After
investigation, a charge-sheet under Section 323 and 506 I.P.C. was
submitted against the applicant. The learned Magistrate has taken
cognizance on 10.07.2023, whereas no prima facie case is made out against
NA528 No. 46742 of 2025
2

him. Therefore, the cognizance order as well as entire proceedings may be
quashed.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the learned Magistrate has
taken cognizance after perusal of the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the
material collected during the course of investigation. A prima facie offence
is clearly made out against the applicant and, as such, entire proceedings
cannot be quashed.

5. As per record, a First Information Report as Case Crime No. 272 of 2022
under Section 323 and 506 I.P.C. was registered at Police Station Cantt,
District Prayagraj regarding an incident dated 21.09.2022 with an allegation
that while she was walking in her lawn, the applicant came there and started
assaulting her with fists and kicks. Statement of opposite party no.2 and her
mother was recorded under Section 180 BNSS in which they have supported
the prosecution version. After investigation, a charge-sheet under Section
323 and 506 I.P.C. was submitted against the applicant. The learned
Magistrate has taken cognizance on 10.07.2023.

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
applicant. 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 BNSS. At this stage only prima facie case is to
be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P.
Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs.
Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992
SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd.
Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed
defence of the accused 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.

8. Accordingly, the application under Section 528 BNSS is dismissed.

April 16, 2026
Vijay
(Chawan Prakash,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…