Disposed¶19

Suddhi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 May 2026NA528/2015/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS; Section 482 CrPC inherent powers; discharge application direction; summoning order challenged; Charge Sheet No. 01 of 2026; S.T. No. 403 of 2026; Case Crime No. 29 of 2026; P.S. Hardi, Bahraich; Sections 74, 64(1), 115(2), 316(2) BNS; S.161 CrPC statement-based proceedings; abuse of process/harassment contention; bail granted; time-bound disposal (two weeks / 30 days); application disposed of; Court No. 16.

What did the court decide?

Permission to the applicant to file a discharge application before the court below within two weeks, with a direction that if filed, it be decided within a further period of 30 days, strictly in accordance with law; no interference with the summoning order or charge sheet at this stage. ¶19

Suddhi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2015 of 2026

Suddhi

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surya Kant Singh, Shubham Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 16

¶8

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶9

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

¶10

The instant application has been filed with prayer to set-aside the impugned summoning order dated 10/03/2026 passed by Ld. Additional Civil Judge (JD)/ACJM, Bahraich in Session Trial No. 403 of 2026, State Vs Suddhi, U/s 74, 64(1), 115(2), 316(2) B.N.S., P.S. - Hardi, DistrictBahraich and Charge Sheet No. 01 of 2026 dated 20/02/2026 in respect of Case Crime No. 29 of 2026 State Vs Suddhi, U/s 74, 64(1), 115(2), 316(2) B.N.S., P.S. - Hardi, District- Bahraich pending in the Court of Additional Session Judge, FTC-1, Bahraich.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has been granted bail and there is no evidence at all against the applicant and only on the basis of statement recorded by the police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., the whole proceeding has been initiated and chargesheet has been filed. He added that the criminal proceedings against the present applicant is nothing but harassment.

¶12

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that there is no abuse of process of law and only factual matrix has been agitated before this Court and that could not be gone into at this stage, invoking the jurisdiction under

¶13

NA528 No. 2015 of 2026

¶14

¶15

Section 482 Cr.P.C. and thus the application is liable to be dismissed.

¶16

After the argument at length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that interest of justice would be sub-served, if this Court directs the court below to permit the applicants to appear before the court below and file an application of discharge. He further submits that the court below may be directed to decide the discharge application within stipulated period of time, as may be fixed by this Court.

¶17

Learned AGA for the State has no objection to the aforesaid submission.

¶18

In view of aforesaid, the applicant is permitted to file an application for discharge before the court below within a period of two weeks from today and if such an application is filed, the same shall be decided within a further period of 30 days, strictly in accordance with law.

¶19

With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of .

¶20

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶21

May 19, 2026

¶22

V. Sinha

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suddhi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suddhi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Pushpendra @ Pushpendra Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Awdhesh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Mohd. Musha @ Musa vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Anil Kumar (in Charge Sheet Anil Yadav) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Himanshu Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another