Dismissed¶¶12

Nimal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2025NA528/23558/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC Court No. 77; Justice Saurabh Srivastava; Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 23558 of 2025; quashing application; Charge Sheet No. 406/2024 dt. 25.10.2024; cognizance/summoning order dt. 01.01.2025; Case Crime No. 0483 of 2024; BNS Sections 333, 115(2), 118(1)/117(2), 351(2); Police Station Swar; District Rampur; First Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Rampur; no illegality found in charge-sheet or cognizance order; application dismissed 15.10.2025; other lawful remedies remain available to applicants; State of U.P. opposite party.

What did the court decide?

On bare perusal of the record after hearing rival submissions, there appears to be no illegality and impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order, and the court concerned has rightly proceeded against the applicants. ¶¶11

Nimal and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23558 of 2025

¶3

Nimal And 3 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

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

¶6

Court No. - 77

¶7

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

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

¶9

This application has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceeding as well as Charge Sheet No. 406/2024 dated 25.10.2024 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 01.01.2025, (State vs. Nirmal and others) arising out of Case crime no.0483 of 2024 under Sections 333, 115(2), 118(1)/117(2) and 351(2) B.N.S, Police Station Swar, District Rampur pending in the court of learned First Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), Rampur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the proceeding initiated against the applicants is illegal and against the material available on record; the material of investigation does not disclose commission of any alleged offences against the applicants and as such the proceedings initiated against the applicants 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 applicants by way of submitting that the averments whatsoever has been raised by learned counsel for applicants is subject matter of trial and submitted that after considering the material available on record, charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicants upon which learned court concerned has rightly taken cognizance and summoned the applicants.

¶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 applicants.

¶12