Dismissed¶14

Arshad Ali and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2026NA528/49144/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS quashing application; Electricity Act Section 135 electricity theft case (Case Crime No. 633 of 2021, Special Case No. 923 of 2025, P.S. Antipower Tehft, District Ballia); challenge to cognizance/summoning order dated 14.07.2025 of Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Session Judge, Ballia; dismissed as not pressed; liberty granted to approach competent court/authority; no merits decided; no precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file an appropriate application/proceedings before the court of competent jurisdiction/authority; certified copy of the order may be returned to learned counsel for the applicant after retaining a xerox thereof. ¶14

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

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 49144 of 2025

¶3

Arshad Ali And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashok Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Chetan Chatterjee, G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 76

¶9

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶10

Sri Ashok Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Kavindra Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Chetan Chatterjee, learned Standing Counsel for the power corporation and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

¶11

The present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Special Case No. 923 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 633 of 2021, under Sections 135 of Electricity Act, Police Station- Antipower Tehft, DistrictBallia, as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 14.07.2025 pending in the Court of Special Judge (E.C. Act)/ Additional Session Judge, Ballia.

¶12

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press this application and wants liberty to file an appropriate application/ proceedings before the court of competent jurisdiction/ authority.

¶13

Certified copy of the order may be returned to the learned counsel for the applicant after retaining a xerox thereof.

¶14

In view of the above, the application is dismissed as not pressed with the aforesaid liberty.

¶15

May 5, 2026 Ishan

¶16

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arshad Ali and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshad Ali and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Seema Bano @ Pooja and Another vs State of Up and 4 Others

Suresh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rohit Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Aayushi @ Gulaksha Bano and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashok Dangi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Arpita and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others