Mohd. Asad @ Arshad vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned charge sheet dated 26.10.2024 along with cognizance/summoning order dated 20.11.2024 passed in Special Sessions Trial No.1352/2024, State vs. Rashid @ Mohd. Habibul Islam and others, arising out of FIR No.308 of 2023, under sections 306 IPC and 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act, P.S. Kunda, District Pratapgarh, which is currently pending before learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh, as contained in Annexure No.1 and 2, to this writ petition.

¶13

To stay the proceedings in Special Sessions Trial No.1352/2024, State vs. Rashid @ Mohd. Habibul Islam and others, arising out of FIR No.308 of 2023, under sections 306 IPC and 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act, P.S. Kunda, District Pratapgarh, which is currently pending before learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh, during the pendency of this petition before this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice."

¶14

A482 No. 553 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the applicant was named in the FIR, the investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officer by recording the statements of witnesses. He further submits that a suicide note was taken into consideration by the Investigating Officer and that, in the aforesaid note, there is no allegation against the applicant. He also submits that, as per the prosecution case, money was taken from the deceased by Pramod and Rashid for providing a plot; however, the same was not provided, and the deceased was cheated, pursuant to which he committed suicide and requested necessary action against Pramod and Rashid. It is further submitted that there is no evidence of abetment against the applicant. Lastly, it is submitted that the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer in a most mechanical manner.

¶17

Relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Mariano Anto Bruno and another vs. Inspector of Police, (2023) 15 SCC 560 and R. Shashirekha vs. State of Karnataka and others, (2025) SCC Online SC 671 , learned counsel for the applicant requests for kind indulgence of this Court.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and that all such submissions may be raised at the appropriate stage; therefore, no interference is required at this stage. However, he does not dispute the fact that in the suicide note, the deceased made a request for taking necessary action against Pramod and Rashid.

¶19

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going to the contents of the petition as well as the other relevant material, it is evident that in the suicide note, the deceased made a request for taking necessary action against Pramod and Rashid.

¶20

In view of above, the matter requires consideration.

¶21

Issue notice to the private respondent.

¶22

List this case in the first week of April, 2026.

¶23

A482 No. 553 of 2026

¶24

3

¶25

Until further orders of this Court, the impugned proceedings shall remain stayed in relation to applicant only.

¶26

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶27

February 5, 2026

¶28

Renu/-

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Asad @ Arshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Asad @ Arshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Girendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Prasad Yadav and 35 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and 7 Others

Shishu Pal Singh (Head Constable , PNO-972140461) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Shiv Ram Singh vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Communication New Delhi and 2 Others

Jyoti vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 3 Others