Ram Sawari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Ram Sawari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of: prayer for quashing declined; however, the applicants are at liberty to move a discharge application, which the Trial Court must decide by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks after hearing both parties, and no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants till disposal of the discharge application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 28.06.2022 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi, the entire criminal proceedings in Complaint Case No. 8443 of 2021 under Section 420 IPC, and the order dated 05.1.2022 of the Sessions Judge, Kaushambi in Criminal Revision No. 132 of 2022 should be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

Court's answer

On perusal of the material on record, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants; all submissions relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court in proceedings under Section 528 BNSS.

Ratio / Principle

The power to quash 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.

Key takeaways

Prayer for quashing the summoning order and the criminal proceedings is declined.ratio¶11
Since the matter pertains to a warrant case instituted on a private complaint, 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.ratio¶15
Till disposal of the discharge application, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.) declined to quash, under Section 528 BNSS, the summoning order dated 28.06.2022 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi in Complaint Case No. 8443 of 2021 (Jai Prakash v. Shardha Prasad and others) under Section 420 IPC, Police Station Manjhanpur, and the order dated 05.1.2022 of the Sessions Judge, Kaushambi in Criminal Revision No. 132 of 2022, holding that the material did not show absence of offence and that the submissions raised disputed questions of fact incapable of adjudication in quashing jurisdiction, exercisable only for failure of justice or abuse of process. The application was disposed of with a direction that any discharge application moved by the applicants be decided by the Trial Court in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks, and that no coercive measures be taken against the applicants till disposal of such discharge application.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 44199 of 2025

Ram Sawari And 2 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rakesh 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.

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to allow the present applicant and quash the impugned summoning order dated 28.06.2022 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi as well as entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 8443 of 2021 (Jai Prakash v. Shardha Prasad and others) under Section 420 IPC, Police Station-Manjhanpur, District-Kaushambi and order dated 05.1.2022 passed by Sessions Judge, Kaushambi in Criminal Revision No. 132 of 2022 (Shradha Prasad and others v. State of U.P. and another).

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.

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. 44199 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 applicants in the aforesaid case.

With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of .

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

November 18, 2025 Aditya Tripathi

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