Mahajan Patel and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mahajan Patel and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the summoning order dated 27.2.2025 and the complaint proceedings refused; however, applicants protected from coercive action for 30 days or till filing of a bail application, whichever is earlier, with a direction that any bail application filed within 30 days be considered and disposed of expeditiously in light of Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 27.2.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Varanasi and the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 106572 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504 IPC are liable to be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

Court's answer

On the material on record and the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants.

Ratio / Principle

Submissions at the bar relating to disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated upon by the Court under Section 528 BNSS; the power may be exercised only where there is failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice.

Key takeaways

No interference is required and the prayer of the applicants is refused.ratio¶12
In case the applicants apply for bail before the concerned court within 30 days, the bail application shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.ratio¶13
For a period of 30 days from the date of the order, or till the time of applying for bail before the court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Complaint No. 106572 of 2023.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing — Application under Section 528 BNSS against summoning order dated 27.2.2025 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Varanasi in Complaint No. 106572 of 2023 (Jhamdu @ Jhagdu Rajbhar vs. Mahajan Patel and others) under Sections 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Chaubeypur, District Varanasi — Held, on the material on record it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants; all submissions related to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated under Section 528 BNSS, the power being exercisable only where there is failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice — Prayer refused; application disposed of with a direction that if the applicants apply for bail within 30 days it shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in light of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and no coercive action against the applicants for 30 days or till filing of the bail application, whichever is earlier.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41296 of 2025

Mahajan Patel And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashwani Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 80

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This application under section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 27.2.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Varanasi as well as entire proceedings of Complaint No. 106572 of 2023 (Jhamdu @ Jhagdu Rajbhar vs. Mahajan Patel and others), under Sections 323, 504 IPC, Police Station-Chaubeypur, District Varanasi.

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 applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 B.N.S.S. 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.

Accordingly, prayer of the applicants is refused.

However, considering the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that in case the applicants apply for bail before the concerned court within 30 days 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

NA528 No. 41296 of 2025

2

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 action shall be taken against the applicants in Complaint No. 106572 of 2023 (Jhamdu @ Jhagdu Rajbhar vs. Mahajan Patel and others), under Sections 323, 504 IPC, Police Station-Chaubeypur, District Varanasi.

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

October 28, 2025 P.P.

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

Digitally signed by :- POONAM PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad