Allahabad High Court
NA528/15954/2026 of SITAMBAR @ DEENDAYAL AND 2 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 4 May 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15954 of 2026 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. This application has been filed to set aside the quashing
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15954 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 applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
2. This application has been filed to set aside the quashing of summoning order dated 09.03.2026 as well entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1627 of 2024 (Raghav Vs. Sitampbar @ Deendayal and others), under Sections 309, 332(3), 115(2), 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station Bivar, District Hamirpur, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (D.A.A.), Hamipur.
3. On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the complaint disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support in the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. on the basis whereof the summoning order has been passed against the applicant.
4. This Court in exercise of its power under Section 528 BNSS is not required to assess the correctness of the allegations and reliability of evidence. Thus, the prayer to quash the summoning order and the consequential proceeding is refused.
5. The present application stands disposed of with the direction that in case applicants appear before the court concerned and apply for bail within 15 days from today, the same shall be decided by the court concerned in accordance with law in view of the guidelines of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021). Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Uday Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sitambar @ Deendayal And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
6. For a period of 15 days no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. May 5, 2026 Mustaqeem. NA528 No. 15954 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad