Ankit Kumar Pandey and 4 Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Sept 2025NA528/1166/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 528 BNSS/482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings based on an FIR lodged on identical facts to a previous one, the High Court observed force in the application. It granted a stay on the proceedings and issued notice to the opposite party.

What did the court decide?

Stay of criminal proceedings pending hearing; notice issued to opposite party to file objection affidavit.

Ankit Kumar Pandey and 4 Others vs the State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1166 of 2025

¶3

Ankit Kumar Pandey And 4 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gauri Suwan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 14

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

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

¶11

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.3616 of 2025; State Vs. Arun Kumar. arising out of Case Crime No.312 of 2025 under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur including the charge sheet dated 09.05.2025 as well as summoning order dated 13.06.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur.

¶12

The argument put-forth by learned counsel for the applicants is that initially, an FIR was lodged under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 of DP Act at P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Sultanpur while roping all the family members including the husband of the victim, whereafter, the investigation was commenced and charge sheet was filed against the husband only and the trial is going on. He further submits that on the same set of facts, the present FIR bearing Case Crime No.312 of 2025 has been lodged under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur. He next argued that there are bitter relation in between the parties and, therefore, there was no occasion that the alleged victim could reside with the family members or husband against whom, the first information report was

¶13

NA528 No. 1166 of 2025

¶14

¶15

lodged under the similar set of facts and the trial is going on against the husband. He further added that the present FIR is sheer abuse of process of law. Thus, the submission is that the criminal proceeding may be quashed.

¶16

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid but he could not dispute the fact that the FIR of case in question was lodged on the identical set of facts, on which basis, the previous FIR was lodged.

¶17

Prime facie, there seems to be force in the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicants. Thus, matter requires consideration.

¶18

Let the notice be issued to the opposite party no.2, returnable at an early date.

¶19

Steps be taken within a week.

¶20

List this case in the week commencing 27.10.2025.

¶21

In the meantime, opposite parties may file objection/counter affidavit.

¶22

Till the next date of listing, criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.3616 of 2025; State Vs. Arun Kumar. arising out of Case Crime No.312 of 2025 under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur shall remain stayed, so far as the applicants are concerned.

¶23

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶24

September 16, 2025

¶25

V. Sinha

¶26

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankit Kumar Pandey and 4 Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Kumar Pandey and 4 Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gayadeen Verma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Krishna Biswas and Another vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Tele. Mini. of Communication and Info. of Tech. and 2 Others

Ramesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Babu Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Vijay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Sursati Devi (in Fir Sursati) and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. U.P. Lko. and Another