Allahabad High Court

IBRAHIM AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 23 March 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The Court held that a prima facie case is made out against the applicants and therefore the application to quash under Section 528 CrPC is dismissed.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the CrPC seeking to quash a summoning order dated 18‑05‑2022 and the related criminal proceedings (Case No. 681 of 2025) for offences under Sections 323 and 504 IPC. They argued that the matter is a civil dispute, that the magistrate failed to consider the complainant’s and witnesses’ statements properly, and that no prima facie case exists against them. The State contended that the complaint, the statements under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC, and the material collected establish a prima facie offence. 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 can be assessed, not the merits of the defence. Finding that a prima facie case does exist, the Court refused to quash the proceedings and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

Whether the summoning order and the criminal proceedings under Sections 323 and 504 IPC should be quashed on the ground that no prima facie case exists against the applicants.
Whether the High Court can entertain a Section 528 CrPC application at the pleading stage despite disputed facts.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 200, 202, 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504

Subjects

Section 528 CrPC
quash criminal proceedings
prima facie case
IPC 323
IPC 504
criminal procedure
summary dismissal

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 50070 of 2025

Ibrahim And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

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

Court No. - 81
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and
perused the record. No one is present on behalf of opposite party no.2.

2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants
to quash the summoning order dated 18.05.2022 passed by Judicial
Magistrate, Court No. 23, Azamgarh in Complaint No. 91 of 2021, Motin v.
Naushad and others, as well as entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 681
of 2025, under Section 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Phoolpur, District Azamgarh.

3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicants that there is a
civil dispute pending between parties. Opposite party no.2 filed the present
compliant regarding the incident dated 13.05.2016 against the applicants.
The opposite party no.2 got himself examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and
witnesses Mool Chand Yadav and Yunus under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The
learned Magistrate has not taken into consideration the statements of
complainant and witnesses properly and summoned the applicants under
Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. whereas no prima facie case is made out against
the applicants, therefore, the 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 complaint, the statements of the complainant 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.
NA528 No. 50070 of 2025
2

5. As per record, opposite party no.2 filed a compliant against the applicants
regarding the incident dated 13.05.2016 in which he has made an allegation
that the applicants have beaten him. The opposite party no.2 got himself
examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and witnesses Mool Chand Yadav and
Yunus under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate has
summoned the applicants under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C.

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 is dismissed.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
March 24, 2026
Vijay

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…