Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:16179 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34093 of 2024 Applicant :- Rahul Chakravorty And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rishi Kant Rai,Sudhir Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi,G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Rishi Kant Rai, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Mr. Shri Prakash Dwivedi, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicants-Rahul Chakravorty and 5 others, who are charge sheeted accused have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 75902/2024 'State Vs. Rahul Chakravorty & others' Case Crime No 0103/2024, U/s 328, 376, 506 IPC, Police Station Chitaipur, District-Varanasi pending before ACJ (S.D.) Room No. 4/ACJM, Varanasi arising out of impugned charge sheet dated 15.07.2024 as well as impugned summoning order/cognizance order dated 02.09.2024 passed by ACJM-I Court No.-4, Varanasi." It is further prayed that during pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court, the further proceeding of Case No. 75902/2024, 'State Vs. Rahul Chakravorty & others' Case Crime No 0103/2024, U/s 328, 376, 506 IPC, Police Station Chitaipur, District-Varanasi pending before ACJ (S.D.) Room No. 4/ACJM, Varanasi arising out of impugned charge sheet dated 15.07.2024 as well as impugned summoning order/cognizance order dated 02.09.2024 passed by ACJM-I Court No.-4, Varanasi, may kindly remain stayed, and/or be pleased to pass such other and further orders, which this Hob'le Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant would suffer irreparable loss and injury." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Mr. Shri Prakash Dwivedi, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 submit that applicants have rushed to this Court by filing the present application under Section 528 BNSS without availing statutory remedy available under Section 250 BNSS. They further submit that Court below can deal with the grounds raised in support of this application threadbare at the first instance as it has the advantage of original record. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Mr. Shri Prakash Dwivedi, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 submit that no interference is warranted by this Court in present application under Section 528 BNSS. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State for State-opposite party-1, Mr. Shri Prakash Dwivedi, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping this application pending, as the grounds raised by the learned counsel for applicants in support of this application can very well be examined by Court below meticulously at the time of deciding the discharge application as Court below has the advantage of having the original record. 7. Accordingly this application is disposed off finally with a direction to the applicants to approach Court below by filing a discharge application in terms of Section 250 BNSS seeking their discharge in above mentioned criminal case. In case, such a discharge application is filed by applicants within a period of two weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order, the Court below shall proceed to decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months thereafter, provided there is no other legal impediment. 8. It goes without saying that till the disposal of discharge application as directed above, Court below shall not proceed further with the matter. 9. After aforementioned order was dictated, the learned counsel for applicants submits that applicants have not yet been enlarged on bail. 10. In view of above, the applicants shall file application for bail along with discharge application before Court below. On such application having been filed, Court below shall enlarge the applicants on interim bail. Interim bail granted to applicants shall come to an end by the order having been passed upon the discharge application. Order Date :- 5.2.2025/Vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad