Dismissed¶13

Sintu @ Balveer Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Oct 2025NA528/24552/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of quashing application under Section 528 BNSS (Allahabad HC, 29.10.2025, Saurabh Srivastava, J.) challenging charge sheet dated 26.04.2019 and cognizance/summoning order dated 26.10.2021 in Case No. 4629 of 2021 arising from Case crime no. 106 of 2021, Sections 323/324/427/504/506 IPC, P.S. Ahirauli Bazar, District Kushinagar; court found no illegality or impropriety in the charge sheet or summoning order; remedies left open to the applicant.

What did the court decide?

There is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order; the court concerned has rightly proceeded against the applicant. ¶12

Sintu @ Balveer Singh 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. - 24552 of 2025

¶3

Sintu @ Balveer Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashutosh
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 26.04.2019 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 26.10.2021, in Case No.4629 of 2021 (State vs. Sintu @ Balveer) arising out of Case crime no.106 of 2021 under Sections 323, 324, 427, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Ahirauli Bazar, District Kushinagar pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar.

¶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