Disposed

Mohammad Asad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2025NA528/21461/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of charge sheet, cognizance order and proceedings under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC. Court held disputed questions of fact could not be adjudicated in inherent jurisdiction, declined quashing, permitted discharge application within 30 days to be decided by reasoned order, and barred coercive measures meanwhile.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mohammad Asad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21461 of 2025

¶3

Mohammad Asad

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Santosh Kumar Pandey, Saurabh Tripathi : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 78

¶7

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

¶8

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

¶9

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 07.08.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 15.01.2025 passed by learned A.C.J.M./S.D./F.T.C., Gorakhpur, District-Gorakhpur in Case No. 1588 of 2025, State of U.P. Vs. Mohd. Ashad and others arising out of Case Crime No. 348 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Gulharia, Distric-Gorakhpur by which the learned Magistrate summoned the applicant under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC as well as quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 1588 of 2025, State of U.P. Vs. Mohd. Ashad and others arising out of Case Crime No. 348 of 2024 under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Gulharia, DistrictGorakhpur, pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M./S.D./F.T.C., Gorakhpur, District-Gorakhpur.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Sections 406 and 420 IPC cannot exist simultaneously in the same set of facts.

¶11

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to secure the ends of justice.

¶12

NA528 No. 21461 of 2025

¶13

¶14

Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

¶15

However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that in case the applicant moves an application for discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel within 30 days, the same shall be disposed of by the Trial Court by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter.

¶16

For a period of 30 days or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶17

With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of .

¶18

September 16, 2025 Shivani

¶19

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Asad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mohammad Asad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases