Allahabad High Court
NA528/15925/2026 of SMT. NANKI DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS on 4 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15925 of 2026 Court No. - 82 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. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed for
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15925 of 2026
Court No. - 82
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. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of the order dated 21.02.2026 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Revision No. 22 of 2024 (Smt. Nisha Devi Vs. State and others), whereby the revision filed by the opposite party No. 2 was allowed by the court of Sessions while rejecting the order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, rejecting the complaint filed by the opposite party No. 2.
3. On perusal of the record, the Court finds that on the complaint filed by the opposite party No. 2 to summon the accused-applicants to face the trial was rejected by the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, which order was challenged by the opposite party No. 2 before the revisional court, who vide its impugned order allowed the said revision while rejecting the order of the concerned trial court directed the court consider to pass fresh order in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Thus, there appears no illegality, impropriety or infirmity in the impugned order and same has been passed in correct perspective.
4. The application has no merit and is liable to be dismissed.
5. Dismissed accordingly. May 5, 2026 Mustaqeem. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shyam Narayan Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Smt. Nanki Devi And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad