Dismissed

Kameshwar Prasad Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2025NA528/23607/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought quashing of proceedings under Sections 323, 406, 504, 506 IPC including charge sheet and cognizance order. Court found no illegality or impropriety and dismissed the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Kameshwar Prasad Pandey 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. - 23607 of 2025

¶3

Kameshwar Prasad Pandey

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Prashant Singh, Virendra Singh Parmar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 77

¶7

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶8

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

¶9

This application has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceeding as well as Charge Sheet dated 16.01.2021 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 06.03.2021, In Case No.2739 of 2021 (State vs. Kameshwar Prasad Pandey) arising out of Case crime no.07 of 2021 under Sections 323, 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Puramufti, District Kaushambi pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

In view thereof, the instant application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merit and is hereby dismissed .

¶14

NA528 No. 23607 of 2025

¶15

¶16

However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the applicant from availing the remedies which are available to him as per law.

¶17

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

¶18

October 15, 2025

¶19

Rakesh

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kameshwar Prasad Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Kameshwar Prasad Pandey 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

Similar cases

Riyasat and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Aman Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Naiem and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramvir vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogesh vs State of U.P.

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