Disposed¶20

Gauri Shankar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2025NA528/1383/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS 2023; IPC Sections 323, 504, 506, 452; Case Crime No. 0366/2024; Charge Sheet No. 378/2024 dated 11.07.2024; Summoning Order dated 04.04.2025; Police Station Reusa, District Sitapur; Additional Civil Judge/FTC/C.A.W.; applicant not pressing application; liberty to file bail application; bail to be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Application not pressed; applicant allowed to appear before the trial court within two weeks and file a bail application, which shall be decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51; the application stands disposed of accordingly. ¶20

Gauri Shankar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 0366/2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C., the Charge Sheet No. 378/2024 dated 11.07.2024 and the Summoning Order dated 04.04.2025 should be quashed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶11

Ratio / Principle

On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the court provided that if the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and files a bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (supra).

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Shree Prakash Singh, J. — Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 1383 of 2025 filed by Gauri Shankar seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 0366/2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C., the Charge Sheet No. 378/2024 dated 11.07.2024 and the Summoning Order dated 04.04.2025 in 'State versus Gauri Shankar and others', Police Station Reusa, District-Sitapur, pending before the learned Additional Civil Judge/FTC/C.A.W., Sitapur. Learned counsel for the applicant did not press the application and sought liberty to file a bail application before the trial court; learned A.G.A. raised no objection. On due consideration, the court provided that if the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and files a bail application, it shall be decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51. The matter was disposed of accordingly on September 25, 2025.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1383 of 2025

Gauri Shankar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prabhat Dwivedi, Dharmendra Kumar 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 applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶11

The instant application under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 0366/2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C., and the subsequent Charge Sheet No. 378/2024 dated 11.07.2024 and Summoning Order dated 04.04.2025, in the case titled State versus Gauri Shankar and others, relating to Police Station Reusa, District-Sitapur, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Civil Judge/FTC/C.A.W., Sitapur, in the interest of justice.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case with false and frivolous allegations. The applicant has not committed alleged offence.

¶13

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that prima facie, the offence is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that these are disputed questions of fact, which can be adjudicated only after adducing the evidence. He further controverts the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant on the ground that this is not a stage where minute and meticulous exercise with regard to the appreciation of evidence may be done and truthfulness of the allegations could only be tested in a criminal trial and, therefore, the application is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.

¶14

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that they do not want to press the application and seek liberty to file bail application before the learned trial court which may be decided in view of law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the

¶16

NA528 No. 1383 of 2025

¶17

¶18

applicant.

¶19

On due consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is provided that in case, the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks from today and file bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously in view of law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (supra).

¶20

The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

¶21

September 25, 2025 Haseen U.

¶22

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶23

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

Gauri Shankar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gauri Shankar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Surendra Prasad Singh @ Surendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Vs the State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Chanda Devi Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ram Sajivan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Gauri Shankar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dinesh Pratap Singh vs U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Thru. Its Managing Director and Another