Smt. Roshni Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Roshni Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the proceedings and the summoning order refused. However: (i) if the applicant applies for bail before the concerned court within four weeks, it shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773; (ii) no coercive measures against the applicant for 30 days from the date of the order or till the bail application is filed, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 28296 of 2023 (Dalchand vs. Roshni and Others) under Sections 417, 506, 385 IPC and the summoning order dated 27.6.2025 should be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

Court's answer

On the material on record, at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicant.

Ratio / Principle

All submissions advanced related to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Key takeaways

The inherent/quashing power may be exercised only where there has been failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, or the sentence or order was not correct, to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice; no such case being made out, no interference was required and the quashing prayer was refused.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.) disposed of Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 39203 of 2025 filed by Smt. Roshni seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 28296 of 2023 (Dalchand vs. Roshni and Others) under Sections 417, 506, 385 IPC, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra, and of the summoning order dated 27.6.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Agra. Holding that prima facie an offence was made out and that the submissions raised only disputed questions of fact incapable of adjudication in proceedings of this nature, exercisable only where there is failure of justice, misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, or an incorrect sentence or order, so as to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice, the Court refused the quashing prayer. By way of interim protection, the Court directed that any bail application moved within four weeks be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and that no coercive measures be taken against the applicant for 30 days or till filing of the bail application, whichever is earlier. Decided October 9, 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39203 of 2025

Smt. Roshni

	Versus	.....	Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Arfi, Rakesh Kumar	Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

Court No. - 80

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant to allow this application and to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 28296 of 2023 (Dalchand vs. Roshni and Others) under Sections 417, 506, 385 IPC, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Agra as well as summoning order dated 27.6.2025 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Agra in Complaint Case No. 28296 of 2023 (Dalchand vs. Roshni and Others) under Sections 417, 506, 385 IPC, Police Station Jagdishpura, District Agra.

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Only in cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, sentence or order was not correct, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of miscarriage of justice. Therefore, no interference is required.

NA528 No. 39203 of 2025

2

Accordingly, prayer of the applicant is refused .

However, considering the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that in case the applicant applies for bail before the concerned court within four weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.

For a period of 30 days from today or till the time of applying the bail application before the court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant.

With the above observations, this application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is disposed of.

October 9, 2025

Puspendra

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

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