Dismissed¶¶16

Premanshu Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2025NA528/33860/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS quashing application dismissed; Section 311 Cr.P.C. application to summon mark sheet at belated stage; defence evidence closed 27.8.2022; Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement 15.4.2022; matter fixed for final argument; unnecessary adjournments; order sheet not on record; attempt to delay trial; S.T. No.20/2016; Case Crime No.373 of 2015; Sections 498-A, 323, 304-B IPC; Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; P.S. Nawabganj, Kanpur Nagar; Additional Session Judge Court No.11 Kanpur Nagar; order dated 11.08.2025; Allahabad High Court; Vikram D. Chauhan, J.; decided September 8, 2025.

What did the court decide?

The trial court had recorded a specific finding that the applicant is trying to delay the trial court proceedings, which this Court took into account. ¶¶13

Premanshu Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the application under Section 528 BNSS for quashing the impugned order dated 11.08.2025 passed in S.T. No.20/2016, connected with the applicant's Section 311 Cr.P.C. request to summon his mark sheet, should be entertained at the belated stage when the trial is fixed for final argument. +1 more

¶¶8

Court's answer

The trial court had recorded a specific finding that the applicant is trying to delay the trial court proceedings, which this Court took into account.

¶¶13

Ratio / Principle

At the belated stage when the matter was fixed for final argument, the applicant did not demonstrate from the order sheet of the trial court that no unnecessary adjournment had been taken, and the order sheet was not brought on record.

¶¶15

Key takeaways

Since the applicant is trying to delay the proceedings of the trial, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is dismissed.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 528 BNSS (Allahabad High Court) seeking quashing of the order dated 11.08.2025 of the Additional Session Judge, Court No.11, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No.20/2016 (State Vs. Premanshu Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No.373 of 2015 under Sections 498-A, 323, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act — applicant's grievance related to his Section 311 Cr.P.C. application for summoning his mark sheet from the school concerned (his stand: the victim failed an examination and committed suicide). By the time of the application, the Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement (15.4.2022) and defence evidence (closed 27.8.2022) were complete, an additional statement of the accused was recorded on 18.4.2023, and the matter stood fixed for argument; the applicant had regularly sought time to argue and filed the present application only on 23.7.2025. The Court noted the trial court's specific finding that the applicant was trying to delay the trial, that the applicant failed to demonstrate from the trial court's order sheet that no unnecessary adjournments had been taken, and that the order sheet was not brought on record. Holding the applicant was attempting to delay the trial, the Court dismissed the application.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33860 of 2025

¶3

Premanshu Kumar

¶4

	.....	Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Aman	Arya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 76

¶6

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application has been filed by applicant for quashing the impugned order dated 11.08.2025 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No.11, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No.20/2016 (State Vs. Premanshu Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No.373 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 323, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Nawabganj, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant submits that application was filed by applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the mark sheet from the school concerned. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is being proceeded under Sections 498-A, 323, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. Learned counsel for applicant submits that as per stand of the applicant, the victim has failed in the examination as a result of same she as committed suicide.

¶10

Perusal of the impugned order would go to show that statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of the applicant was recorded on 15.4.2022 and thereafter five defence witnesses were produced and thereafter on 27.8.2022 defence was closed and additional statement of accused was recorded on 18.4.2023 and thereafter, matter was fixed for argument. As per record, applicant has been regularly seeking time to argue the case and thereafter present application was filed on 23.7.2025. The trial court

¶11

NA528 No. 33860 of 2025

¶12

¶13

has recorded a specific finding that applicant is trying to delay the trial court proceedings.

¶14

On a query being made to learned counsel for applicant as to why aforesaid application was not filed at the time of defence evidence, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that applicant was not aware of the document.

¶15

It is to be seen that at such belated stage when the matter is being fixed for final argument and the applicant has not demonstrated from the order sheet of the trial court that no unnecessary adjournment has been taken. Neither the order sheet of the trial court has been brought on record.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, since the applicant is trying to delay the proceeding of trial, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is dismissed .

¶17

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

¶18

September 8, 2025

¶19

D. Tamang

¶20

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Premanshu Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Premanshu Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Lata Goel vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Jitendra Kumar Alias Jeetu vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Arif and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Bakar vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhudev Sing Indolia vs State of U.P. and 2 Others