Dismissed¶19

Nekpal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2026CRLR/383/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, CRLR No. 383 of 2026, Nekpal And 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another; framing of charge under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 325/34, 307/34, 504, 506 IPC upheld; 12 injuries with grievous fractures (ankle joint, both elbow joints), danger to life, doctor's opinion injuries may lead to loss of life; plea of alibi/CCTV contention deferred to trial; Sessions Judge Sambhal at Chandausi order dated 19.12.2025 in S.T. No. 41 of 2025 (Case Crime No. 88 of 2024, P.S. Rajpura) not interfered with; revision dismissed by Abdul Shahid, J. on February 16, 2026.

What did the court decide?

There are multiple injuries and multiple fractures on the injured Chhatrapal, including 12 injuries and an ankle fracture, and the injuries are dangerous to his life. ¶17

Nekpal and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 19.12.2025 framing charge against the revisionists under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 325/34, 307/34, 504, 506 IPC is liable to be set aside on the ground that the intention to cause death is missing and the injuries are insufficient for a charge under Section 307 IPC. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

There are multiple injuries and multiple fractures on the injured Chhatrapal, including 12 injuries and an ankle fracture, and the injuries are dangerous to his life.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Prima facie there is sufficient material to frame charges against the revisionists under Section 307 IPC as well as the other sections; the final interpretation is to be given after recording of the evidence of the prosecution and defence.

¶17

Key takeaways

The plea of alibi taken by the revisionists has to be seen at the stage of trial and not at the charge-framing stage.ratio¶14
There is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order framing charge; the revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision (CRLR No. 383 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Abdul Shahid, J., February 16, 2026) against order dated 19.12.2025 of the Sessions Judge, Sambhal at Chandausi in S.T. No. 41 of 2025 framing charge against the revisionists under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 325/34, 307/34, 504, 506 IPC (Case Crime No. 88 of 2024, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal): injured Chhatra Pal sustained 12 injuries, injury nos. 1 and 2 caused by incised weapon, with grievous fractures of the ankle joint and both elbow joints; Dr. Manmohan Sharma opined the injuries may lead to loss of life. Held: prima facie there is sufficient material to frame charge under Section 307 IPC as well as the other sections, final interpretation to be given after evidence at trial; the plea of alibi has to be seen at the stage of trial; no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order; criminal revision dismissed.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 383 of 2026

¶3

Nekpal And 3 Others

¶4

	Versus .....Revisionist(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Aushim Luthra, Harishchandra Yadav : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 87

¶6

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶8

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

¶9

The present criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 19.12.2025, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sambhal at Chandausi in S.T. No. 41 of 2025 (State Vs. Manoj and others), arising out of case crime No. 88 of 2024, whereby charge has been framed against the revisionists under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 325/34, 307/34, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Rajpura, District Sambhal.

¶10

Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that the incident is of 21.3.2024 at 17.00 hours. The FIR was lodged on 22.3.2024 at 00.12 hours. He has vehemently submitted that there is no injury on the vital part of the body. The injury, if any, is not sufficient to frame charge under Section 307 IPC. There is CCTV camera which verifies that Nekpal was not present at the place of incident. The intention to cause death is missing, hence the impugned order dated 19.12.2025 is liable to be set aside and the criminal revision is entitled to be allowed.

¶11

Learned AGA has submitted that the charges have already been framed. The question of fact could not be decided in criminal revision. There is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. The criminal revision is thus liable to be dismissed.

¶12

CRLR No. 383 of 2026

¶13

¶14

The plea of alibi taken by the revisionists, that has to be seen at the stage of trial. The injury report of injured Chhatra Pal is on record. There are 12 injuries on the injured and injury no. 1 and 2 is caused by incised weapon and other injuries on ankle joint hip and part of the body. The witness Jagat Pal has recorded his statement during investigation that Chhtrapal has been beaten by his co-villagers, Manoj, Durvesh, Nekpal, Pappu by lathi-danda and axe. He has raised his hands and tried to cover his head to save himself.

¶15

The supplementary injury report of injured Chhatrapal is having x-ray of ankle joint, fracture both bone, right elbow joint, fracture both bone, left elbow joint fracture both bone. The injury was grievous in nature.

¶16

The statement of Dr. Manmohan Sharma was recorded. He has verified that injured Chhatrapal is having 12 injuries. The injury nos. 1 and 2 is caused by hard and sharp pointed object and injury nos. 3,4,5,6 and 9 caused by hard and rough object and injury nos. 7,10 and 12 caused by blunt object. In the report, doctor found fracture. On the question whether as per medical report of injured Chhatrapal, it may lead to loss of his life. The reply by doctor "yes".

¶17

There is multiple injuries and multiple fracture to the injured and it is also danger to his life. There are 12 injuries and ankle fracture on the injured Chhatrapal. The final interpretation could be given after recording of evidence of the prosecution and defence. Prima facie, there is sufficient material to frame charges under Section 307 IPC as well as in other sections.

¶18

In view thereof, there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. The revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

¶19

The criminal revision is dismissed.

¶20

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶21

February 16, 2026 sfa/

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nekpal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nekpal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dr Mohd Azeem Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonveer Singh vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Rajendra Prasad Mishra vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sangam Lal Aarak vs State of U.P. and Another

Arjun Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Agrawal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others