NA528/51427/2025 of VIKASH DUBEY AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 12 May 2026

1. Heard Sri Saurabh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sapan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party No.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 BNSS to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 08.05.2025 along with cognizance and summoning order dated 06.10.2025 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Crl. Case No.22642 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.115 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 117(2) B.N.S. against Applicant No. 1 and under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 110, 117(2), 324(4) B.N.S. against Applicant No. 2, P.S. Gopiganj, District Bhadohi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi Gyanpur.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case on account of a civil dispute between the parties. It is further submitted that opposite party No. 2 lodged a First Information Report, registered as Case Crime No. 115 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 110, 117(2) and 324(4) of the B.N.S., against the present applicants and five other named persons, alleging therein that on 02.03.2025 at about 7:00 p.m., Sanjay Dubey along with his family members assaulted his brother, Omshanker Dubey, with an iron rod, causing injuries on his shoulder. It was further alleged Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saurabh Pandey, Suresh Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Dheeraj Kumar Yadav, G.A., Sapan Kumar Singh, Yasmeen Jahan Vikash Dubey And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

that the injured was taken for medical treatment and when the informant and his family members returned home at about 12:00 midnight, Sanjay Dubey, Amresh Dubey, Ramesh Dubey, Vikas Dubey, Maju Devi and Sharda Tiwari allegedly assaulted his sister, Khushboo Dubey, with an axe, as a result of which she sustained serious injuries. Thereafter, the injured person was taken to the hospital where she was medically examined. He further submits that the medical examination reports do not support or corroborate the allegations levelled in the First Information Report. During investigation the statements of injured and other witnesses were recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. The statements of witnesses highly doubtful. The Investigating Officer, ignoring the material collected during the course of investigation, which does not substantiate the allegations levelled against the present applicants, the Investigating Officer, without conducting a fair and proper investigation submitted the charge sheet against the applicants. Thereafter the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence vide order dated 06.10.2025 without proper application of judicial mind and without considering the material discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution case. It is thus submitted that no offence is made out against the applicants, and the impugned order has been passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the impugned order and charge sheet are liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.2 have vehemently opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicants and contended that the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned cognizance order strictly in accordance with law. It is submitted that, as per the allegations made in the First Information Report, the applicants initially assaulted the brother of opposite party No. 2 with an iron rod, causing injuries to him, thereafter he was taken for medical examination. When the informant and his family members returned home, the applicants allegedly assaulted the sister of opposite party No. 2 with an axe, causing serious injuries to her, thereafter she too was taken for medical examination. The medical examination reports duly support and corroborate the prosecution case. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the injured persons and other witnesses under Section 180

B.N.S.S. and, on the basis of oral as well as documentary evidence collected during investigation, submitted the charge sheet against the applicants. From the material available on record, a prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants. It is submitted that, at the stage of taking cognizance, the Court is only required to examine whether a prima facie case is made out or not. He further submits that the charge sheet has been filed after due investigation and the material collected therein clearly discloses the commission of offences against the applicants. There is no illegality, irregularity, or perversity in the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate. Therefore, the present application is liable to be dismissed.

5. From the record, it transpires that opposite party No. 2 lodged a First Information Report, registered as Case Crime No. 115 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 191(2), 110, 117(2) and 324(4) B.N.S., against the applicants and five other named persons alleging that on 02.03.2025 at about 7:00 p.m., the accused persons assaulted Omshanker Dubey with an iron rod and he was taken for medical treatment and when the informant and his family members returned home the applicants and other persons assaulted Khushboo Dubey sister of opposite party No.2 with an axe, causing injuries to her. The injured Om Shanker Dubey was medically examined at CHC Gopiganj and Khushboo Dubey was medically examined at Traum Centre & Super Speciality Hospital, Kashi Hindu Vishwavidyalaya on 3.3.2025. The medical report duly support allegations as made in the First Information Report. During investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the injured persons and other witnesses under Section 180 B.N.S.S., submitted the charge sheet against the applicants. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate, upon perusal of the police report and material brought on record, took cognizance of the offence vide order dated 06.10.2025.

6. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Section 528 B.N.S.S. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme

Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma,

SCC (Cr.)

and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. May 13, 2026 Md Faisal

(Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad