Mohd. Ibrahim and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mohd. Ibrahim and 5 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 17.12.2024 and the entire proceedings refused; however, the Court directed that any bail application made by the applicants before the concerned court within four weeks shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and that no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants for 30 days or till a bail application is filed, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaunpur, in Complaint Case No. 221 of 2023 (Sahana Begum vs. Mohd. Ibrahim) under Sections 323 and 504 IPC, and the entire proceedings, ought to be quashed under Section 528 B.N.S.S. +2 more

Court's answer

No interference is required, and accordingly the prayer of the applicants to quash the summoning order and proceedings is refused.

Ratio / Principle

On 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.

Key takeaways

All the submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 B.N.S.S.ratio¶9
The power under Section 528 B.N.S.S. may be exercised only where the Court finds failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, or that the sentence or order was not correct, so as to prevent abuse of process and miscarriage of justice; on that yardstick no interference was called for here.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 45088 of 2025, disposed of on November 17, 2025: the application seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaunpur, in Complaint Case No. 221 of 2023 (Sahana Begum vs. Mohd. Ibrahim) under Sections 323 and 504 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Kerakat, District Jaunpur, along with the entire proceedings, was refused. The Court held that on the material on record it could not be said that prima facie no offence was made out against the applicants; all submissions at the bar related to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated under Section 528 B.N.S.S.; and the quashing power arises only where the Court finds failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, or that the sentence or order was incorrect, to prevent abuse of process and miscarriage of justice. Protective directions: bail applications to be made within four weeks shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773; and for 30 days, or until such bail application is filed (whichever is earlier), no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 45088 of 2025

Mohd. Ibrahim And 5 Others

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

Court No. - 80

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

Heard Ms. Nagma Quadir holding brief of Sri Aqeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 17.12.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaunpur in Complaint Case No. 221 of 2023 (Sahana Begum vs. Mohd. Ibrahim) under sections 323 and 504 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Kerakat, District Jaunpur as well as entire proceedings.

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 528 section 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 and 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

NA528 No. 45088 of 2025

2

the concerned court within four weeks 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 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 measures shall be taken against the applicants.

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

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

November 17, 2025 Puspendra

Digitally signed by :- PUSPENDRA NARAYAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad