Allahabad High Court
GULAM RASOOL AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- CHAWAN PRAKASH
Holding
The Court held that a prima facie case was established and therefore the application for quash under Section 528 CrPC was dismissed.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash the charge‑sheet and proceedings in a criminal case alleging offences under IPC Sections 352, 351(2) and 333. They contended that the investigation was flawed, the statements of the complainant and witnesses were contradictory, and no prima facie case existed. The State argued that the FIR, statements and material collected established a prima facie case. The High Court examined the material and, following Supreme Court precedents, held that at the stage of a Section 528 application only the existence of a prima facie case is relevant and the disputed facts cannot be adjudicated. Finding that a prima facie case was made out, the Court refused to quash the proceedings and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can quash the charge‑sheet and proceedings under Section 528 CrPC when a prima facie case exists.
- Whether contradictions in the statements of the complainant and witnesses defeat the existence of a prima facie case.
- Whether the court may consider the defence of the accused at the stage of a Section 528 application.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
- Indian Penal Code — s. 333, 351(2), 352
Subjects
- Section 528 CrPC
- quash of criminal proceedings
- prima facie case
- investigation flaws
- IPC Sections 352 351(2) 333
- High Court dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 46777 of 2025
Gulam Rasool And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Mishra,
Umesh Pal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
1. Heard Mr. Umesh Pal Singh, learned Counsel for applicants
and learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicants with the following prayer:
"It respect fully prayed that this is most Hon'ble Court in the
interest of justice may graciously be pleased to allow this present
application for quashing the impugned charge sheet No.
104/2025 dated 25.05.2025 including cognizance dated 8.9.2025
and summoning order dated 8.10.2025 Criminal case No.1447 of
2025 (State Vs. Ikbal & 2 others) as well as entire proceeding of
Case No. 115 of 2025 arising out of case crime No.0115/2025
Under Section 352, 351(2), 333 B.N.S., P.S- Kotwali Shahabad,
District Rampur pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Court No.1, Rampur."
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the opposite
party no.2 lodged an F.I.R. as Case Crime No. 115 of 2025 under
Sections 352, 351(2) and 333 BNS against the applicants with an
allegation that on 09.05.2025 they entered his house, hurled
abuses and threatened him for dire consequences. During
investigation, statement of opposite party no.2 and other
witnesses were recorded. There is material contradiction in
NA528 No. 46777 of 2025
2
between the statements of opposite party no.2 and the witnesses.
The Investigating Officer did not conduct fair and proper
investigation and filed a charge-sheet against the applicants under
Sections 352, 351(2) and 333 BNS and the learned Magistrate has
taken cognizance on it on 08.09.2025, whereas no prima facie
case is made out against the applicants, therefore, the impugned
cognizance/summoning order as well as entire proceedings of the
aforesaid case may be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal
of the allegations made in the F.I.R., the statements of the
informant and witnesses and the material collected during the
course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out
against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be
quashed.
5. As per record, opposite party no.2 lodged an F.I.R. as Case
Crime No. 115 of 2025 under Sections 352, 351(2) and 333 BNS
against the applicants with an allegation that on 09.05.2025 they
entered his house, hurled abuses and threatened him for dire
consequences. During investigation, statement of opposite party
no.2 and other witnesses were recorded. The Investigating Officer
filed a charge-sheet against the applicants under Sections 352,
351(2) and 333 BNS and the learned Magistrate has taken
cognizance on it on 08.09.2025.
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
NA528 No. 46777 of 2025
3
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 is dismissed.
April 23, 2026
Vijay
(Chawan Prakash,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…