Smt. Sheelawati and 10 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Sheelawati and 10 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceeding in Complaint Case No. 115 of 2016 (including the summoning order dated 21.10.2016) and the revision order dated 30.05.2018 in Criminal Revision No. 12 of 2017 ought to be quashed under Section 528 B.N.S.S.

Court's answer

On the material on record, at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants.

Ratio / Principle

Submissions relating to disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated under Section 528 B.N.S.S.; that power may be exercised only where there is failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, sentence or order was not correct, to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice.

Key takeaways

No interference is required; the prayer of the applicants to quash the proceedings is refused.ratio¶11
If the applicants apply for bail before the concerned court within 30 days, the bail application shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.ratio¶14
No coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Complaint Case No. 115 of 2016 for 30 days or until the bail application is filed, whichever is earlier.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Nand Prabha Shukla, J.; decision dated December 2, 2025): Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 47762 of 2025 by Smt. Sheelawati and 10 others, seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in Complaint Case No. 115 of 2016 (Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC; Police Station-Naghfani, District-Moradabad; Prem Lata and others versus Sheelawati and others), the summoning order dated 21.10.2016 of the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1st, Moradabad, and the order dated 30.05.2018 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 13th, Moradabad in Criminal Revision No. 12 of 2017. Holding that prima facie an offence was made out against the applicants and that their contentions involved disputed questions of fact incapable of adjudication under Section 528 B.N.S.S. — a power reserved for failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice — the Court refused the prayer. As protective measures, it directed that a bail application moved within 30 days be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and that no coercive action be taken for 30 days or until the bail application is filed, whichever is earlier. The application was disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 47762 of 2025

Smt. Sheelawati And 10 Others

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others		...	..Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Narendra Kumar, Singh : G.A.	Rabindra	Bahadur

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 B.N.S.S. has been preferred to allow this application and quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case as well as summoning order dated 21.10.2016 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1st, Moradabad in Complaint Case No. 115 of 2016, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Naghfani, District-Moradabad (Prem Lata and others Versus Sheelawati and others) as well as order dated 30.05.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 13th, Moradabad in Criminal Revision No. 12 of 2017 (Smt. Sheelawati and others Versus State of U.P. and others).

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 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 of miscarriage of justice. Therefore, no interference is required.

Accordingly, prayer of the applicants is refused.

NA528 No. 47762 of 2025

2

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 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 action shall be taken against the applicants in Complaint Case No. 115 of 2016, under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Naghfani, District-Moradabad (Prem Lata and others Versus Sheelawati and others).

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

December 2, 2025 Shivani

(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad