Allahabad High Court
NA528/40695/2026 of HUZAIFA Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 22 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40695 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40695 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 applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of non bailable warrant order dated 24.01.2016 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 01, Bulandshahar in Criminal Case No. 724 of 2016 (Old Nos. 1179 of 2011 & 242 of 2016), arising out of Case Crime No. 177 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 336, 307, 436, 341, 353, 3312 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case praying for quashing of impugned order. The prayer praying for quashing of same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.
5. However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Huzaifa .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within twenty days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.
6. For a period of aforesaid twenty days from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.
7. The present application stands disposed of. (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) September 23, 2026 Mustaqeem. NA528 No. 40695 of 2026 2
Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad