Allahabad High Court
NA528/14660/2026 of DEEPAK KUMAR AND 2 OTHERS Vs STATE OF U.P THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY(HOME) U.P., LUCKNOW AND ANOTHER on 19 April 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14660 of 2026 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., has been filed praying for quashing the
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14660 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 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., has been filed praying for quashing the proceedings arising out of S.S.T. No. 40 of 2016 arising out of Complaint Case No. 23 of 2016 (Subhash Arya Vs. Deepak Kumar and others) under Section 392, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Piluwa, District Etah pending before learned Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), District Etah and also to quash the summoning order dated 23.04.2016.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the matrimonial dispute has been dragged in criminal prosecution of the applicants and after issuance of summoning order, non-bailable-warrant is also running against the applicants. The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants 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. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case praying for quashing of impugned order. The prayer praying for quashing of same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.
5. However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within three weeks from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karma Singh Yadav, Meenu Verma, Neeraj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Deepak Kumar And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P Through Principal Secretary(Home) U.P., Lucknow And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
6. For a period of three weeks from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance.
7. The present application stands disposed of.
April 20, 2026 S.Ali NA528 No. 14660 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad