Allahabad High Court
NA528/42121/2026 of PRINCE YADAV AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 29 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42121 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 record. 2. This application has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of Case No.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42121 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 record.
2. This application has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of Case No. 380 of 2026 (State Vs. Prince Yadav_ arising out of Case Crime No. 0229 of 2025 under Section 420 I.P.C., and 66 D I.T. Act, Police Station Dadon, District Alilgarh pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Atrauli, District Aligarh and also to quash the charge sheet dated 25.12.2025 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 09.07.2026 passed in the aforesaid case.
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 of B.N.S.S. 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 rejected.
5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicants and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicants by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicants.
6. As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Prince Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific direction need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.
September 30, 2026 S.Ali NA528 No. 42121 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad