Allahabad High Court
NA528/37373/2026 of SUDESH PASWAN Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 7 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37373 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 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. - 37373 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 record.
2. This application has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of Case No. 60338 of 2026 (State Vs. Suraj Kumar Uraon and others) under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 427, 323, 504, 506, 452, 283, 505(1)(b) I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Varanasi and also to quash the charge sheet dated 05.05.2025 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 04.05.2026 passed in the aforesaid case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that initially F.I.R. was lodged against 12 named and one unknown person, in which the applicant was not named in the F.I.R., however his name surfaced in the statement of co-accused. Learned counsel further argued 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. 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 applicant.
5. 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sudesh Paswan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicant.
7. 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 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.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.
September 8, 2026 S.Ali NA528 No. 37373 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad