Intezar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Intezar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash declined; however, interim protection granted — if the applicants move a discharge application, the Trial Court must dispose of it within six weeks by a reasoned and speaking order after hearing both parties (if no other legal impediment), and no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants till the disposal of the discharge application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 06.03.2024 in Complaint Case No. 19197 of 2022 and the judgment/order dated 01.10.2025 in Criminal Revision No. 61 of 2005 should be granted under Section 528 BNSS. +1 more

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

The submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court; the quashing power may be exercised only where there is failure of justice or abuse of procedure, to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

Key takeaways

The prayer for quashing the impugned orders is declined.ratio¶11
Since the matter is a warrant case instituted on private complainant, if the applicants move a discharge application, the Trial Court shall dispose of it in accordance with law after hearing both parties by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks of the application, if there is no other legal impediment; and till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 42289 of 2025 — Intezar and another v. State of U.P. and another (decided 30.10.2025). Prayer to quash the summoning order dated 06.03.2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 9, Bijnor in Complaint Case No. 19197 of 2022 (Amjad v. Sahabaj and others) under Sections 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali City, District Bijnor, along with the judgment and order dated 01.10.2025 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Bijnor in Criminal Revision No. 61 of 2005, was declined: it could not be said at that stage that no offence was made out, the submissions relating to disputed questions of fact not adjudicable in a Section 528 BNSS proceeding, exercisable only on failure of justice or abuse of process. As the matter is a warrant case instituted on private complainant, the applicants were permitted to move a discharge application, to be disposed of by the Trial Court within six weeks by a reasoned and speaking order after hearing both parties (absent legal impediment), with no coercive measures against the applicants till its disposal. Application disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42289 of 2025

Intezar And Another

.....Applicant(s)

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

Court No. - 80

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

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

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned judgement and order dated 01.102025 passed by Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Bijnor in Criminal Revision No. 61 of 2005 (Intezar and another v. State of U.P. and another) as well as impugned summoning order dated 06.03.2024 passed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) Court No. 9, Bijnor in Complaint Case No. 19197 of 2022 (Amjad v. Sahabaj and others) under Section 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali City, District-Bijnor.

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 applicant. 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.

Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

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,

NA528 No. 42289 of 2025

2

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 legal impediment.

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

With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of .

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

October 30, 2025 Aditya Tripathi

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad