Allahabad High Court
NA528/39350/2026 of RAM MILAN AND 2 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 22 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39350 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 Criminal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39350 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 Criminal Case No.21421 of 2025 (State Vs. Ram Milan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 301 of 2024 under Sections 329(3) of B.N.S. and Section 3 of The Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Sonha, District Basti pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, IIIrd, Court No.11, District Basti as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 24.12.2024 and also to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 03.12.2025 passed in the aforesaid case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel further submits that the prosecution case initiated against the applicants being arbitrary and illegal, is nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. He further submits that the impugned summoning order suffers from gross error and non-speaking because there is no material under which, the applicants could be summoned, therefore the proceedings initiated against the applicants pursuant to the summoning order is liable to be quashed. Further submission is that malafides behind the prosecution are apparent on the face of record and if the proceedings against the applicants is allowed to go on, it will result in the abuse of court's process. Learned counsel for the applicants therefore submits, no prosecution could lie against the applicants, in such circumstances, interference of this Court is required to meet the ends of justice.
4. 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.
5. This Court in exercise of its power under section 528 of B.N.S.S., is not required to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sheetala Prasad Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Milan And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
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.
6. The application lacks merit and is dismissed.
(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) September 23, 2026 S.Ali NA528 No. 39350 of 2026 2
Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad