Disposed¶14

Rohit Puri v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 May 2026NA528/19399/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS against NBW/order under Section 83 Cr.P.C. dated 29.04.2026, charge sheet dated 03.10.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 28.01.2025 in Sessions Case No. 368 of 2026 (Case Crime No. 117 of 2024, Sections 420/120-B IPC and Section 7-A PC Act, P.S. Sarsawa, Saharanpur, Special Judge PC Act). Applicant not named in FIR, name surfaced in investigation; undertaking to surrender; Court ordered appearance within two weeks and kept NBW order in abeyance meanwhile, with execution permitted on default; application disposed.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to appear before the trial court within two weeks; impugned order dated 29.4.2026 kept in abeyance for that period; failing appearance, respondent authority to execute the order without fail. ¶14

Rohit Puri vs State of U.P. and Another — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the N.B.W./proceedings under Section 83 Cr.P.C. dated 29.04.2026, the charge sheet dated 03.10.2024, the summoning/cognizance order dated 28.01.2025 and the entire criminal proceedings of Session Case No. 368 of 2026 arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2024 are liable to be quashed.

¶9

Court's answer

In view of the statement of learned Senior Advocate for the applicant, the applicant is directed to appear before the trial court within two weeks from the date of the order.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

For a period of two weeks, the impugned order dated 29.4.2026 shall be kept in abeyance.

¶14

Key takeaways

If the applicant fails to appear before the trial court within the time prescribed, the respondent authority shall execute the order without fail.ratio¶14
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the application is disposed of.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vikram D. Chauhan, J.) disposed of an application under Section 528 BNSS (No. 19399 of 2026) filed by Rohit Puri seeking quashing of the N.B.W./proceedings under Section 83 Cr.P.C. dated 29.04.2026, charge sheet dated 03.10.2024, summoning/cognizance order dated 28.01.2025 and the entire criminal proceedings of Session Case No. 368 of 2026 (Old Session Case No.222 of 2025) (State of U.P. Vs. Rohit Puri) arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2024 under Sections 420, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 7-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Sarsawa, District Saharanpur. The applicant, who was not named in the First Information Report and whose name surfaced during investigation, undertook to surrender and appear before the trial court within two weeks; the learned AGA had no objection. The Court directed the applicant to appear before the trial court within two weeks, kept the impugned order dated 29.4.2026 in abeyance for that period, and directed that if the applicant failed to appear, the respondent authority shall execute the order without fail.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19399 of 2026

¶3

Rohit Puri

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ram Prakash Srivastava	Vishwakarma, Sunil
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 73

¶7

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

¶8

Heard learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶9

The present application is filed for quashing the order of N.B.W./Proceeding under Section 83 Cr.P.C. dated 29.04.2026 alongwith charge sheet dated 03.10.2024 as well as summoning/cognizance order dated 28.01.2025 including entire criminal proceedings of Session Case No. 368 of 2026 (Old Session Case No.222 of 2025) (State of U.P. Vs. Rohit Puri) arising out of Case Crime No. 117 of 2024 under Sections 420, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 7-A of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station Sarsawa, District Saharanpur, Additional Session Judge / Special Judge, Special Court No.1 (Prevention of Corruption Act), Saharanpur.

¶10

It is submitted by learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant that proceedings under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. have been drawn by impugned order dated 29.4.2026 and summoning/cognizance order was issued on 28.1.2025. It is submitted that applicant was not named in the First Information Report and his name has surfaced during investigation. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that applicant is ready to surrender and appear before the court concerned within two weeks from today.

¶11

Learned AGA has no objection.

¶12

NA528 No. 19399 of 2026

¶13

¶14

Be that as it may and in view of statement of learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant, let the applicant appear before the trial court within two weeks' from today. For a period of two weeks', the impugned order dated 29.4.2026 shall be kept in abeyance. If the applicant fails to appear before the trial court within the time prescribed hereinabove, respondent authority shall execute the order without fail.

¶15

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the application is disposed of.

¶16

May 12, 2026

¶17

D. Tamang

¶18

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit Puri v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Puri v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Jitendra Sharma @ Jeetu vs State of Up and Another

Harinarayan and Others vs State of Up and Another

Mahendrapal vs State of U.P.

Srinath Verma and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahul @ Manish Chaudhary vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raghunandan Parasar vs State of U.P. and Another