VIKASH DUBEY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 51427 of 2025

Vikash Dubey And Another
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State Of U.P. And Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Saurabh Pandey, Suresh Chandra
                                Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dheeraj Kumar Yadav, G.A., Sapan
                                Kumar Singh, Yasmeen Jahan

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

1. Heard Sri Saurabh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri
Sapan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party No.2, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.


2. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court
under Section 528 BNSS to quash the impugned charge sheet dated
08.05.2025 along with cognizance and summoning order dated
06.10.2025 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Crl. Case No.22642
of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.115 of 2025, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 117(2) B.N.S. against Applicant No.
1 and under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 110, 117(2), 324(4)
B.N.S. against Applicant No. 2, P.S. Gopiganj, District Bhadohi, pending
in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi Gyanpur.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have
been falsely implicated in the present case on account of a civil dispute
between the parties. It is further submitted that opposite party No. 2
lodged a First Information Report, registered as Case Crime No. 115 of
2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 110, 117(2) and 324(4)
of the B.N.S., against the present applicants and five other named persons,
alleging therein that on 02.03.2025 at about 7:00 p.m., Sanjay Dubey
along with his family members assaulted his brother, Omshanker Dubey,
with an iron rod, causing injuries on his shoulder. It was further alleged
                                                      NA528 No. 51427 of 2025
                               2


that the injured was taken for medical treatment and when the informant
and his family members returned home at about 12:00 midnight, Sanjay
Dubey, Amresh Dubey, Ramesh Dubey, Vikas Dubey, Maju Devi and
Sharda Tiwari allegedly assaulted his sister, Khushboo Dubey, with an
axe, as a result of which she sustained serious injuries. Thereafter, the
injured person was taken to the hospital where she was medically
examined. He further submits that the medical examination reports do not
support or corroborate the allegations levelled in the First Information
Report. During investigation the statements of injured and other witnesses
were recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. The statements of witnesses
highly doubtful. The Investigating Officer, ignoring the material collected
during the course of investigation, which does not substantiate the
allegations levelled against the present applicants, the Investigating
Officer, without conducting a fair and proper investigation submitted the
charge sheet against the applicants. Thereafter the learned Magistrate took
cognizance of the offence vide order dated 06.10.2025 without proper
application of judicial mind and without considering the material
discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution case. It is thus
submitted that no offence is made out against the applicants, and the
impugned order has been passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the
impugned order and charge sheet are liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for opposite party
No.2 have 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, as per the allegations made in the First Information
Report, the applicants initially assaulted the brother of opposite party No.
2 with an iron rod, causing injuries to him, thereafter he was taken for
medical examination. When the informant and his family members
returned home, the applicants allegedly assaulted the sister of opposite
party No. 2 with an axe, causing serious injuries to her, thereafter she too
was taken for medical examination. The medical examination reports duly
support and corroborate the prosecution case. It is further submitted that
during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the
statements of the injured persons and other witnesses under Section 180
                                                       NA528 No. 51427 of 2025
                                3


B.N.S.S. and, on the basis of oral as well as documentary evidence
collected during investigation, submitted the charge sheet against the
applicants. From the material available on record, a prima facie offence is
clearly made out against the applicants. 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. From the record, it transpires that opposite party No. 2 lodged a First
Information Report, registered as Case Crime No. 115 of 2025, under
Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 110, 117(2) and 324(4) B.N.S.,
against the applicants and five other named persons alleging that on
02.03.2025 at about 7:00 p.m., the accused persons assaulted Omshanker
Dubey with an iron rod and he was taken for medical treatment and when
the informant and his family members returned home the applicants and
other persons assaulted Khushboo Dubey sister of opposite party No.2
with an axe, causing injuries to her. The injured Om Shanker Dubey was
medically examined at CHC Gopiganj and Khushboo Dubey was
medically examined at Traum Centre & Super Speciality Hospital, Kashi
Hindu Vishwavidyalaya on 3.3.2025. The medical report duly support
allegations as made in the First Information Report. During investigation,
the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the injured persons
and other witnesses under Section 180 B.N.S.S., submitted the charge
sheet against the applicants. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate, upon
perusal of the police report and material brought on record, took
cognizance of the offence vide order dated 06.10.2025.

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 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. At this stage only
prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme
                                                                                        NA528 No. 51427 of 2025
                                                                   4


                                    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.)
                                    May 13, 2026
                                    Md Faisal




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