Sanju Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

The present application has been filed to quash the Charge Sheet dated 6.2.2023; cognizance/summoning order dated 22.2.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Case No.596/2023 (State Vs. Amitabh & Ors) arising out of Case Crime No.227 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 of I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Chunar District Mirzapur, pending before the First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Mirzapur.

¶13

Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is wife of coaccused Amitabh Singh, who sold the property to another person, after selling the disputed property to the informant. The applicant is lady having no concern with the alleged offence and she has been implicated being wife of co-accused Amitabh Singh. Cognizance/summoning order passed by learned Magistrate, is without application of judicial mind and the same is liable to be quashed.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State submitted that considering the material evidences and allegations against the applicant on record, as on date, as per prosecution case, the cognizable offence against the applicant is made out. Under the facts and circumstances of the present case as well as materials on record against the applicant, the criminal proceedings against the applicant cannot be said to be abuse of process of Court. There is no illegality in the impugned summoning order and instant 528 BNSS application is liable to be dismissed.

¶15

After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the entire record, this Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 528 BNSS cannot assume such

¶16

NA528 No. 26428 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that the power under Section 528 BNSS at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sprangly, only in such an appropriate case, where on the face of record, the criminal proceeding is clear abuse of the process of the Court. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.

¶19

It is also well settled that at the stage of summoning the accused, the court below is not required to go into the merit and demerit of the case. Genuineness or otherwise of the allegation cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused. There is no good ground to invoke inherent power under Section 528 BNSS by this Court, at this stage. The relief as claimed by the applicant through this application is refused.

¶20

The defence version of the applicant has to be considered by the court concerned at the appropriate stage. The accused/applicant has statutory remedy of moving discharge application before the court concerned at the appropriate stage.

¶21

Considering the material on record, it is directed that, if objection/discharge application is filed on behalf of the applicant before the court concerned within two weeks, it is expected that the court concerned will consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of two months, in accordance with law.

¶22