Allahabad High Court
NA528/50662/2025 of DURGA PRASAD ALIAS BATUA AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 6 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 50662 of 2025 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Suresh Chandra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 50662 of 2025
Court No. - 79
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Suresh Chandra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Rohit Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.
3. The applicants filed the present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. to quash the entire proceeding of Charge sheet dated 18.01.2025 in Case Crime No. 189 of 2024, under Sections 333, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Saiya, District Agra as well as summoning order dated 03.10.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 6, Agra.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that a first information report as Case Crime No.189 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 333, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. was registered at Police Station Saiya, District Agra against the applicants with an unexplained delay of three days. He further submits that as per the allegation made in the first information report, the applicants and other persons came at the house of opposite party no. 2 and they beaten him along with his daughter but there is no medical report to support the allegation as alleged against the applicants. He further submits that during investigation, the statement of injured was recorded wherein Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Niharika Singh Parihar, Suresh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Rohit Kumar Chaturvedi, G.A. Durga Prasad Alias Batua And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
she has stated that she received no injury. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicants and learned Magistrate took cognizance. He next submits that on the basis of allegations made in the first information report, no case is made out against the applicants, therefore, cognizance order as well as charge sheet is liable to be set aside.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submissions as made by learned counsel for the applicants and submitted a first information report was registered against the applicants. During investigation, statements of the injured, doctor and other were recorded, wherein they supported the prosecution version. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the applicants and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance. The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants have no relevance and it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants, therefore, application is liable to be dismissed.
6. As per facts of the case, a first information report as Case Crime No.189 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 333, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. was registered at Police Station Saiya, District Agra against the applicants regarding the incident dated 19.09.2024. The injured was medically examined. During investigation, statements of the injured, doctor and other witnesses were recorded. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicants and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance. The delay in registering the first information report after three days, as per settled provisions of law, could only be decided by the learned trial court during trial.
7. From the perusal of material on record and the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed questions on 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 to be considered in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the case of RP Kapoor Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1990 SC 66; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Criminal) 426; and State of Bihar NA528 No. 50662 of 2025
Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Criminal) 192. The disputed defence of the applicants cannot be considered at this stage.
8. 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 and the application is dismissed. May 7, 2026 Rmk. NA528 No. 50662 of 2025
(Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad