Disposed¶19

Rashid and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Oct 2025NA528/41597/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Nand Prabha Shukla, J. (29.10.2025), APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. 41597 of 2025, Rashid And 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another. Quashing of complaint case (Sections 452/323/504/506 IPC, P.S. Haldaur, Bijnor) and bailable warrant dated 22.04.2023 refused; disputed facts; discharge application direction (six weeks, reasoned order); interim protection from coercive measures; warrant case on private complaint.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of: quashing declined, but Trial Court directed to decide any discharge application within six weeks by a reasoned and speaking order, and no coercive measures to be taken against the applicants till disposal of the discharge application. ¶19

Rashid and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1430 of 2020 (Nasimuddin vs. Rashid and others) under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and the Bailable Warrant dated 22.04.2023 are liable to be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

¶11

Court's answer

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

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by the High Court in exercise of its quashing jurisdiction.

¶12

Key takeaways

The inherent/quashing power may be exercised only in cases where the Court finds failure of justice or abuse of procedure, to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.ratio¶12
Prayer for quashing the complaint proceedings and the bailable warrant is declined.ratio¶13
If the applicants move a discharge application through counsel at an appropriate stage, the Trial Court shall dispose of it in accordance with law after hearing both parties by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from the date of the application, if there is no other legal impediment.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing under Section 528 BNSS declined. Application to quash entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1430 of 2020 (Nasimuddin vs. Rashid and others) under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Haldaur, District Bijnor, and Bailable Warrant + 15000/- dated 22.04.2023 passed by ACJM-IInd, Bijnor: submissions raised disputed questions of fact not adjudicable by the High Court; quashing power exercisable only on failure of justice or abuse of procedure. Liberty granted to move a discharge application; Trial Court to dispose of it within six weeks by reasoned and speaking order after hearing both parties; no coercive measures against applicants till disposal of the discharge application. Application disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41597 of 2025

Rashid And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Fatma Khatoon
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 80

¶9

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

¶10

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

¶11

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1430 of 2020 (Nasimuddin vs. Rashid and others), under Section 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police StationHaldaur, District- Bijnor as well as Bailable Warrant + 15000/- dated 22.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, IInd, District- Bijnor, District- Bijnor.

¶12

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that 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. Only in cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to secure the ends of justice.

¶13

Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

¶14

However, in the interest of justice as the matter pertains to warrant case instituted on private complainant, it is provided that in case the applicants move an application for discharge through counsel at an appropriate stage, the same shall be disposed of by the Trial Court in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from the date of the application, if there is no other

¶15

NA528 No. 41597 of 2025

¶16

¶17

legal impediment.

¶18

Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶19

With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of .

¶20

October 29, 2025 Anjali

¶21