Dismissed¶14

Rajendra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2025NA528/15604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS; charge sheet dated 26.07.2024; cognizance/summoning order dated 10.09.2024; Criminal Case No.599 of 2024 (State vs. Srikrishna and others); Case crime no.0708 of 2023; Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC; Police Station Faridpur; District Bareilly; Judicial Magistrate Faridpur; Rajendra vs State of U.P. and Another; no illegality or impropriety found in charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order; application dismissed; applicant free to pursue other lawful remedies; decision dated November 25, 2025; single-judge bench (Saurabh Srivastava, J.).

What did the court decide?

There appears to be no illegality or impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order, and the learned court below has rightly proceeded against the applicant. ¶11

Rajendra vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15604 of 2025

¶3

Rajendra

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 77

¶6

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

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

¶8

This application has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceeding as well as Charge Sheet dated 26.07.2024 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 10.09.2024, in Criminal Case No.599 of 2024 (State vs. Srikrishna and others) arising out of Case crime no.0708 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Faridpur, District Bareilly pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Faridpur, Bareilly.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the proceeding initiated against the applicant is illegal and against the material available on record; the material of investigation does not disclose commission of any alleged offences against the applicant and as such the proceedings initiated against the applicant including the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order are liable to be quashed by this court.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for applicant by way of submitting that the averments whatsoever has been raised by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of trial and submitted that after considering the material available on record, charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant upon which learned court concerned has rightly taken cognizance and summoned the applicant.

¶11

After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties and by bare perusal of record, there appears to be no illegality and impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order and as such learned court concerned has rightly proceeded against the applicant.

¶12

NA528 No. 15604 of 2025

¶13

¶14