Allahabad High Court

VINOD AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 18 March 2026
Bench: NAND PRABHA SHUKLA

Holding

The Court held that the application for quash under Section 528 CrPC must be dismissed as the facts do not demonstrate any abuse of process or failure of justice.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash a summoning order dated 23.07.2019 and subsequent non-bailable warrant orders in a private complaint case (Cr. No. 1264 of 2018) involving offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC. The High Court examined the material and observed that the dispute centered on questions of fact and there was no indication of abuse of process or failure of justice that would justify quashing. Consequently, the prayer for quash was declined. However, the Court directed the trial magistrate to expedite the trial, consider any discharge application within six weeks, and entertain bail applications filed within 45 days, ensuring hearing to both parties. Until a discharge application is decided, no coercive measures are to be taken against the applicants. The application was thus disposed of with these directions.

Issues considered

Whether the summoning order and subsequent non-bailable warrant orders can be quashed under Section 528 CrPC.
Whether there is a failure of justice or abuse of process warranting the exercise of the quash power.
Whether the trial court should be directed to expedite proceedings and entertain discharge and bail applications.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504, 506

Subjects

Section 528 CrPC
quash of summons
private complaint
abuse of process
bail
discharge
expedited trial
Criminal Procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9835 of 2026

Vinod And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Mohan, Upendra Mani Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 76
HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Ram Mohan, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for
the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 23.07.2019 passed by
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah as well as N. B. W. order dated
14.07.2025 and 15.12.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Etah
including the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1264 of 2018 (Geeta
v. Vinod and Others) under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-
Marhara, District-Etah pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate,
Etah.

3. 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 submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed
questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in
cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of
procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to
secure the ends of justice.

4. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

5. However, in the interest of justice as the matter pertains to warrant case
instituted on private complaint, it is provided that in case the applicants
claim discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel, the same shall be
NA528 No. 9835 of 2026
2

disposed of by the Trial Court in accordance with law after giving
opportunity of hearing to both the parties by a reasoned and speaking order
within six weeks from the date of the application, if there is no other legal
impediment. Since the summoning order was issued in the year 2019, trial
Court is directed to expedite the trial proceedings and decide the matter as
early as possible after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

6. In case, the applicants are not on bail, it is further directed that if the
applicants appear or surrender through counsel before the Trial Court and
makes an application for bail within 45 days from the date of the order, the
same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously, after giving
opportunity to the other side.

7. Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive measures shall
be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

8.With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
March 19, 2026
Aditya Tripathi

Digitally signed by :-
ADITYA TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…