Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 149274 (ALL)

ZAID AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. THE PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

NA528/827/2025 · 2025-08-01

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44672 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 827 of 2025 Applicant :- Zaid And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. Heard Sri Satish Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Diwakar Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. By means of instant application under Section 528 BNSS, the applicants have sought quashing of entire proceedings of Case No. 446 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 826 of 2024 under Sections 3/7 of E.C. Act, P.S.-Mohammdi, District-Kheri and Charge sheet No. 0826 of 2024, including summoning order dated 08.05.2025. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of FIR lodged by the informant on the basis of information received from some other person alleging that the applicants were involved in black marketing of food grains meant for public distribution. The question of locus of the person who has lodged the FIR is not relevant and FIR can be lodged by any person. Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of the proprietor of the premises fromwhere food grains were recovered. Sufficiency of evidence cannot be examined by this Court while examining the validity of charge sheet and summoning order and Court can only see as to whether from the allegations levelled in the FIR and material collected during investigation forming basis of submission of charge sheet, prima faice, case regarding involvement of applicant in the in commission of cognizable offence is made or not. Accordingly, this Court does not find any good ground to quash the charge sheet and the summoning order. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants shall seek their release on bail before the trial Court and raise all their plea during trial. Therefore, it is provided that in case, applicants appear before the trial Court and file an application for release of their bail, the same shall be considered and decided by the trial Court in accordance with law keeping in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment passed in the case of Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I., (2021) 10 SCC 773. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Vinay/- Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench