Shoeb Khan @ Mohd. Shoeb Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Anothere U.P. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shoeb Khan @ Mohd. Shoeb Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Anothere U.P. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty given to file a discharge application before the court below within two weeks, to be considered and decided by the court below within a further period of 30 days strictly in accordance with law; the quashing prayer itself was not adjudicated on merits, the application being disposed of with this direction.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 18.11.2024 passed in Sessions Case No. 2638 of 2024 (Crime No. 229 of 2023) and the charge sheet filed against the applicant should be quashed pursuant to the application under section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court permitted the applicant to file an application for discharge before the court below within a period of two weeks, adopting the discharge-application route instead of adjudicating the merits of the quashing prayer.

Ratio / Principle

If such discharge application is filed, the court below shall consider and decide it within a further period of 30 days, strictly in accordance with law; learned AGA for the State had no objection to this course.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 14 — Shree Prakash Singh, J. — Application U/S 482 No. 7208 of 2025 (decided 01.09.2025). Shoeb Khan @ Mohd. Shoeb v. State of U.P. thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home), U.P., Lucknow and another. Applicant sought quashing, under section 482 Cr.P.C./section 528 B.N.S.S. 2023, of the summoning order dated 18.11.2024 passed by Special Judge E.C. Act/A.D.J. 4th, Lucknow, in Sessions Case No. 2638 of 2024 arising from Crime No. 229 of 2023 (P.S. Mandion, Lucknow; sections 147/323/324/332/353/308 I.P.C. read with section 135, Electricity Act 2003) and of the chargesheet filed by the police. Applicant's counsel alleged proceedings rested solely on Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements and amounted to harassment; counsel for the State contended there was no abuse of process and the factual matrix could not be gone into at that stage. On counsel's later proposal, to which the AGA had no objection, the Court permitted filing of a discharge application before the court below within two weeks, to be considered and decided within a further 30 days strictly in accordance with law; application disposed of. Judgment signed September 1, 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7208 of 2025

Shoeb Khan @ Mohd. Shoeb

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Anothere U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajendra Prasad, Akhilesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 14

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The instant application has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 18.11.2024 passed by Special Judge E.C. Act/A.D.J. 4th Lucknow in Sessions Case No. 2638 of 2024, Crime No. 229 of 2023 under section 147/323/324/332/353/308 I.P.C. read with section 135 of Electricity Act 2003 related to police station Mandion Lucknow as well as also the charge sheet filed by the police in respect of petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that there is no evidence at all against the applicant and only on the basis of statement recorded by the police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., the whole proceeding has been initiated and chargesheet has been filed. He added that the criminal proceedings against the present applicant is nothing but harassment.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that there is no abuse of process of law and only factual matrix has been agitated before this Court and that could not be gone into at this stage, invoking the

A482 No. 7208 of 2025

2

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and thus the application is liable to be dismissed.

After arguing at length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that interest of justice would be sub-served, if this Court directs the court below to permit the applicant to appear before the court below and file an application of discharge. He further submits that the court below may be directed to decide the discharge application within stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this Court.

Learned AGA for the State has no objection to the aforesaid submission.

In view of aforesaid, the applicant is permitted to file an application for discharge before the court below within a period of two weeks from today and if such an application is filed, the same shall be considered and decided within a further period of 30 days, strictly in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of.

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

September 1, 2025 AKS

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench