Allahabad High Court
NA528/21344/2026 of AJAY YADAV AND 8 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS on 30 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21344 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. This application has been filed for setting aside of the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21344 of 2026
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
2. This application has been filed for setting aside of the cognizance order dated 23.04.2026 as well as for quashing of charge sheet dated 07.04.2026 including the entire proceeding of Sessions Case No. 720 of 2026 (State Vs. Ajay Yadav and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 42 of 2026, under Sections 74, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 191(2), 127(2) B.N.S. and Section 9/10 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Pharenda, District Maharajganj, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, Exclusive Court (POCSO Act), Maharajganj.
3. On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the applicants.
4. This Court in exercise of its power under section 528 BNSS is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is refused.
5. The present application stands disposed of with the direction that in case applicants appear before the court concerned and apply for bail within 15 days from today, the same shall be decided by the court concerned in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Awadhesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ajay Yadav And 8 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
accordance with law in view of the guidelines of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another(Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021).
6. For a period of aforesaid period of 15 days no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) October 1, 2026 Mustaqeem. NA528 No. 21344 of 2026 2
Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad