Satyaveer vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14301 of 2026

Versus Satyaveer	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	Ravi Shankar Kanojiya G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 81

¶5

HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer:

¶8

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding of Case No.14112 of 2024 (State Vs. Satyaveer and others) under section 323, 504, 506, 420, 452, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Nauganwa Sadat, District-Amroha arising out of case crime No.0566 of 2023 pending in court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha including cognizance/summoning order dated 11.12.2024."

¶9

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The husband of opposite party no.2 executed a sale-deed in favour of mother of the applicant. Thereafter, she filed an F.I.R. against the applicant and other persons by stating that the applicant has committed rape upon her. During investigation, statement of prosecutrix and other witnesses were recorded. Medical examination of the victim was conducted but the same does not corroborate the fact of allegation of rape. The F.I.R. has been

¶10

NA528 No. 14301 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

lodged with the delay of two days and the prosecution has not given any explanation for the same. After investigation, chargesheet was filed against the applicant and other accused persons. The learned Magistrate took cognizance against the applicant under Sections 323, 504 506, 420, 452 and 376 I.P.C. whereas, as per evidence collected during investigation, no offence is made out against the applicant. The learned Magistrate has wrongly taken cognizance against the applicant, therefore, the cognizance order as well as entire proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed.

¶13

Per contra , learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint, the statements of the prosecutrix and witnesses and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicant and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶14

As per record, a First Information Report as Case Crime No. 566 of 2023 was registered against the applicant and 7 other persons. During investigation, statement of prosecutrix and other witnesses were recorded. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the applicant under Sections under Sections 323, 504 506, 420, 452 and 376 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate took cognizance against the applicant under Sections 323, 504 506, 420, 452 and 376 I.P.C.

¶15

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 submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Section 528 BNSS. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly

¶16

NA528 No. 14301 of 2026

¶17

3

¶18

Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

¶20

Accordingly, the application is dismissed .

¶21

April 8, 2026

¶22

Vijay

¶23

(Chawan Prakash,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyaveer v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyaveer 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Bhawar Singh and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sumit Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Subhash Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shivam Vishnoi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guddu @ Radheyshyam and Another vs State of U.P. and Another