Disposed¶16

Faizan @ Mohd Faizan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2025NA528/45764/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS; quashing application disposed; summoning order dated 20.09.2019; Complaint Case No. 2923 of 2018; Anjani Kumar Lohiya v. Faizan; Sections 420 IPC; Chief Judicial Magistrate Jalaun at Orai; disputed questions of fact; abuse of process; discharge application to be decided within six weeks; reasoned and speaking order; expedite trial; no coercive measures; warrant case instituted on private complaint; Allahabad High Court; Nand Prabha Shukla, J.; November 19, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of: quashing declined, but the Trial Court is directed to dispose of any discharge application within six weeks by a reasoned and speaking order, to expedite the trial, and no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant till disposal of the discharge application. ¶16

Faizan @ Mohd Faizan vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 20.09.2019 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2923 of 2018 (Anjani Kumar Lohiya v. Faizan) under Sections 420 IPC should be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

¶7

Court's answer

On the material on record it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant; the submissions raised at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court.

¶9

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.

¶9

Key takeaways

The prayer for quashing the summoning order and the complaint proceedings is declined.ratio¶10
If the applicants move an application for discharge through counsel at an appropriate stage, the Trial Court shall dispose of it in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to 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¶14
Since the summoning order was issued in the year 2019, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial proceedings and decide the matter as expeditiously as possible.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.) disposed of an application under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of a summoning order dated 20.09.2019 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2923 of 2018 (Anjani Kumar Lohiya v. Faizan) under Sections 420 IPC pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai. Holding that the material disclosed an offence and that the submissions related to disputed questions of fact beyond quashing jurisdiction, the Court declined the prayer but directed that any discharge application be decided within six weeks by a reasoned and speaking order, that the trial be expedited given the 2019 vintage of the summoning order, and that no coercive measures be taken against the applicant till disposal of the discharge application.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 45764 of 2025

¶3

Faizan @ Mohd Faizan

¶4

				.....Applicant(s)
		Versus
State of U.P. and Another				.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Mohd. Moham	Samiuzzaman mad Haris	Khan, Syed
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 80

¶5

HON'BLE NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 20.09.2019 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2923 of 2018 (Anjani Kumar Lohiya v. Faizan) under Sections 420 IPC pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the summoning order is of the year 2019.

¶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,

¶12

NA528 No. 45764 of 2025

¶13

¶14

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. Since the summoning order was issued in the year 2019, Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial proceedings and decide the matter as expeditiously as possible.

¶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 19, 2025 Aditya Tripathi

¶19

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

Faizan @ Mohd Faizan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faizan @ Mohd Faizan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Sawari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Colonel R.P.S. Dhillon (Retired) @ Rajinderpal Singh Dhillon vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Dubey and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramswaroop and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Nand Lal Soni and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Jaswant Singh vs State of U.P. and Another