Anuj Malik and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Anuj Malik and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Main prayer to quash the complaint proceedings and summoning order refused; however, interim directions granted: (i) if the applicants apply for bail within 30 days, it shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773; (ii) no coercive measures against the applicants for 30 days or till the bail application is filed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.133/09/2015 (Amit Nirwal Versus Anuj and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Adarsh Mandi, District Shamli, together with the summoning order dated 19.06.2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shamli, ought to be quashed pursuant to this application under Section 528 BNSS.

Court's answer

From the perusal of the material on record and the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants; the quashing prayer therefore does not lie on a prima facie assessment.

Ratio / Principle

All submissions advanced at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 BNSS.

Key takeaways

The power under Section 528 BNSS may be exercised only in cases 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 or miscarriage of justice.ratio¶10
In case the applicants apply for bail before the concerned court within 30 days from the date of this judgment, the bail application shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 45295 of 2025 (Anuj Malik & 3 Others v. State of U.P. & Anr.), disposed of on December 2, 2025. The applicants' prayer to quash Complaint Case No.133/09/2015 (Amit Nirwal Versus Anuj and others) under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. (P.S. Adarsh Mandi, District Shamli) and the summoning order dated 19.06.2015 of the Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shamli was refused. The Court held that prima facie an offence could not be said to be absent at this stage; the submissions raised disputed questions of fact not adjudicable under Section 528 BNSS, a power exercisable only to prevent failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism/procedure. Interim relief: any bail application filed within 30 days to be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and no coercive measures against the applicants for 30 days or till the bail application is filed.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 45295 of 2025

Anuj Malik And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Kuldeep Singh Chahar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.

Court No. - 80

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.133/09/2015 (Amit Nirwal Versus Anuj and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Adarsh Mandi, District Shamli as well as summoning order dated 19.06.2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shamli, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shamli.

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 Section 528 BNSS. 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 of 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 the concerned court within 30 days from today, the same shall be

NA528 No. 45295 of 2025

2

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, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants.

With the above observations, this application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of .

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

December 2, 2025

CS/-

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