Dismissed¶17

Rupesh Chand Kaushik v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2025NA528/28592/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Rupesh Chand Kaushik v. State of U.P. and Another; APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. 28592 of 2025; Allahabad High Court; Court No. 77; Saurabh Srivastava, J.; quashing application; charge sheet dated 17.05.2025; cognizance/summoning order dated 21.05.2025; Criminal Case No.36903 of 2025; Case Crime No.117 of 2024; Sections 328, 302, 34 IPC; Police Station Geeda; District Gorakhpur; Judicial Magistrate-III Gorakhpur; application dismissed as lacking merit; liberty to seek discharge; judgment dated December 2, 2025.

What did the court decide?

It was made clear that the applicant will be at liberty to move an application for seeking discharge. ¶17

Rupesh Chand Kaushik 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. - 28592 of 2025

¶3

Rupesh Chand Kaushik

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Chandra Prakash Singh
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 17.05.2025 alongwith cognizance/summoning order dated 21.05.2025, in Criminal Case No.36903 of 2025 arising out of Case crime no.117 of 2024 under Sections 328, 302, 34 IPC, Police Station Geeda, District Gorakhpur pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-III, Gorakhpur.

¶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