Shobhnath Prajapati vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shobhnath Prajapati vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim stay: further proceedings against the present applicants in the aforementioned case shall remain stayed until further orders of this Court; matter listed on 22.9.2025; both parties to file their respective affidavits, if any. Final quashing prayer not yet decided.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceeding, including the charge sheet dated 24.10.2018 and cognizance/summoning order dated 23.1.2019 in Case No. 82 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 471 of 2018, should be quashed in exercise of the inherent power of this Court under Section 528 BNSS. +2 more

Court's answer

Prima facie, the matter requires consideration.

Ratio / Principle

Until further orders of this Court, further proceedings against the present applicants in the aforementioned case (Special Session Trial No. 26 of 2019) shall remain stayed; the matter is listed on 22.9.2025 and both parties are to file their respective affidavits, if any.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Dinesh Pathak, J.) — Application under Section 528 BNSS No. 23591 of 2025 by Shobhnath Prajapati seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceeding, including charge sheet dated 24.10.2018 and cognizance/summoning order dated 23.1.2019 in Case No. 82 of 2019 (State vs. Jai Prakash Tiwari and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 471 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 468, 504, 506, 471 IPC and 3(1)Dha SC/ST Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi, pending as Special Session Trial No. 26 of 2019 before the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Varanasi. Property dispute over plot No. 393: complainant (respondent No. 2) holds registered sale deed dated 7.9.2012 from original owner Vinod Kumar; agreement to sell dated 7.1.2016 by Vinod Kumar in favour of named accused, with the applicant as marginal witness, alleged never acted upon. Main accused Chandrashekhar Prasad already granted interim relief by coordinate Bench vide order dated 10.2.2021 in Application U/s 482 No. 3637 of 2021. Submissions: FIR alleges caste-based abuse on 7.9.2012 without time or place; nothing shows atrocities because of SC/ST identity; civil litigation given colour of criminal intent. Counter affidavit filed and taken on record; respondent No. 2 absent despite personal service. Held: prima facie the matter requires consideration; until further orders, further proceedings against the applicants shall remain stayed; listed for 22.9.2025; parties to file affidavits, if any.

Court No. - 73

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23591 of 2025

Applicant :- Shobhnath Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

Learned AGA has filed counter affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record. Office to proceed accordingly.

As per paragraph No. 3 of the counter affidavit and annexure No. 1, notice is personally served upon the respondent No. 2. However, despite service of notice, no one is present on behalf of the respondent No. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA representing state-respondent No. 1 and perused the record.

The present applicants have invoked the inherent power of this Court under Section 528 BNSS beseeching the quashing of entire criminal proceeding including the charge sheet dated 24.10.2018 as well as cognizance/summoning order 23.1.2019 in Case No. 82 of 2019 (State vs. Jai Prakash Tiwari and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 471 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 504, 506, 471 I.P.C. and 3(1)Dha SC/ST Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi, pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Varanasi as Special Session Trial No. 26 of 2019.

It has been submitted that genuineness and validity of the agreement to sell dated 7.1.2016 alleged to have been executed by one Vinod Kumar in favour of Jai Prakash Tiwari and Chandrashekhar Prasad has been tried to be assailed in the present criminal proceeding. Complainant (respondent No. 2) is claiming his right and title over the plot No. 393 through registered sale deed dated 7.9.2012 executed by original owner Vinod Kumar. Subsequently, Vinod Kumar has executed an agreement to sale dated 7.1.2016 in favour of the named accused, with regard to the remaining area of the plot No. 393. It is further submitted that the said agreement to sale dated 7.1.216 was never acted upon and the present applicant namely Shobhnath is the marginal witness of the aforesaid agreement to sale. It is next submitted that the main accused Chandrashekhar Prasad had already been granted an interim relief by coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 10.2.2021, in

Application U/s 482 No. 3637 of 2021 (annexure No. 7). As per allegations made in the FIR, on 7.9.2012, the accused has abused caste based slur , however, no time and place has been mentioned in the FIR to substantiate the allegation under the SC/ST Act. There is nothing on record to suggest that the respondent No. 2 has been subjected to atrocities and intentional insult because of his case being a person belonging to the SC/ST community. Civil litigation with regard to the genuineness and validity of the agreement to sale dated 7.1.2016 has illegally been given the colour of criminal intent.

Prima faice, the matter requires consideration.

List this matter 22.9.2025.

In the meantime, both the parties shall file their respective affidavits, if any.

Until further orders of this Court, further proceedings against the present applicants, in the aforementioned case, shall remain stayed.

Order Date :- 5.8.2025 vinay

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad