Allowed¶15

Pramod Sharma v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2026CRLR/1713/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Abdul Shahid, J., Criminal Revision No. 1713 of 2026 (decided 19.03.2026): revision against dismissal of complaint under Section 226 BNSS by Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Budaun; mini trial not permissible at stage of issuance of summons; prima facie case made out where trial court found incident occurred and injuries caused; perverse finding; order set aside; remand for fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision allowed; impugned order dated 1.12.2025 set aside; matter remanded to the court concerned for reconsideration with a direction to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously. ¶15

Pramod Sharma vs State of U.P. and 12 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1713 of 2026

¶3

Pramod Sharma

¶4

.....Revisionist(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. And 12 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Dileep Kumar Shukla, Mohit Singh, Ravi Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 87

¶6

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

Under challenge is the impugned order dated 1.12.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Budaun, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 789 of 2025 (Pramod vs. Niwas and others), whereby the complaint filed by the revisionist has been dismissed under Section 226 of the B.N.S.S.

¶9

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the learned trial court, while passing the impugned order dated 1.12.2025, virtually conducted a mini trial and observed that the incident had occurred; however, the nature of the injuries could not be natural when 12 persons had sustained injuries. Thereafter, the learned trial court itself recorded a finding that, prima facie, the contents of the complaint do not disclose any offence and, on that basis, rejected the complaint.

¶10

A perusal of the record indicates that the learned trial court itself has observed that the incident had occurred and that injuries were caused. Once such a finding has been recorded, a prima facie case clearly appears to be made out. It is well settled that a mini trial is not permissible at the stage of issuance of summons.

¶11

In view of the above, the finding recorded by the learned trial court is

¶12

CRLR No. 1713 of 2026

¶13

¶14

perverse and illegal. Consequently, the impugned order dated 1.12.2025 is hereby set aside.

¶15

Accordingly, the criminal revision is allowed. The matter is remanded to the court concerned for reconsideration. The learned trial court is directed to pass a fresh order, strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously.

¶16

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶17

March 19, 2026

¶18

M. Tarik

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pramod Sharma v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Sharma v. State of U.P. and 12 Others

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

Rameshwar Singh Vs State

Shyamvir vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Kumar Soni vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Afroz Alam and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Aneeta vs State of U.P. and 5 Others