Disposed

Meera Devi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2025NA528/42692/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 528 BNSS for quashing criminal proceedings declined as prima facie offence was made out. Court directed trial court to dispose of discharge application within six weeks with hearing, staying coercive measures pending disposal.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing declined. Directions given to trial court to decide discharge application within 6 weeks, staying coercive measures.

Meera Devi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42692 of 2025

¶3

Meera Devi And 2 Others

¶4

	Versus		.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Dharmendra Yadav	Singh,	Shyam Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 80

¶6

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to allow the application and quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 432 of 2019 (Old Case No. 350 of 2018) under Sections 498A/34, 323/34 and 504/34 IPC, (State v. Ram Kumar Singh and others) pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya and all its consequential orders passed by learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya.

¶9

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.

¶10

Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.

¶11

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

¶12

NA528 No. 42692 of 2025

¶13

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of .

¶17

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

¶18

November 3, 2025

¶19

Aditya Tripathi

¶20

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

Meera Devi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meera Devi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Dixit and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilshad Nawaz Zaidi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Jasvindar Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Hafiz Ali vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Tiwari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Prashant vs State of U.P. and Another