Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36256 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4749 of 2025 Applicant :- Suresh Narayan Pandey And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajkumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajkumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicants, who are three in number, as well as Sri Muniaj Mehrotra, learned AGA for the State/opposite party no.1. 2. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 3957 of 2021 (State Vs. Suresh Narayan Pandey), arising out of Case Crime no. 691 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 147 and 325 IPC Police Station- Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra, pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-Sonbhadra. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that a first information report stood lodged against the applicant no.1 who happens to be a father-in-law of opposite party no.2, applicant no.2, Jeth and applicant no.3, Jethani relatable to the commission of the offences on 14.10.2020, FIR No.0691 of 2020 under Sections 506, 504, 323, 143 IPC, wherein it has been alleged that the applicants herein attacked the husband of the opposite party no.2 and he sustained injuries. He further submits that it is nothing but a counterblast as on 15.10.2020 an FIR No.0693 stood lodged under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC relatable to the commission of the offence on 14.10.2020. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants also submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated nothing but a counterblast. 5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that the offences are made out from the narration of the facts in the nature of the injuries sustained by the opposite party no.2 faction. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the basic question which arises for consideration the extent of judicial intervention in the present proceedings at this stage. Apparently, there happens to be the two sets of FIR, one FIR by opposite party no.2 faction on 14.10.2020, under Sections 143, 323, 504, 506 IPC, FIR No.0691 of 2020 relatable to the commission of the offences on 14.10.2020 at 20.30 hours and the other by the applicants faction on 15.10.2020, FIR No.0693, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC relatable to the commission of the offence on 14.10.2020 at 20.30 hours. Once there happens to be a cross- FIRs relatable to the same date and the same time of the incident then the occurrence of the incident cannot be ruled out, apart from the same the injured who happens to be the husband of the opposite party no.2 has sustained six injuries which are comprises of lacerated wound 2.0 x 0.2 c.m. on right side face head, 1.0 cm above the left eye and as per the radiological report there happens to be fracture of head of the terminal phalanx of little finger is seen. Injuries have also been extended to first informant. Once the injuries are of such nature and the allegations do are reflected in the first information report then in these circumstances, it would not be appropriate to scuttle the proceedings at this stage. Thus, interference is declined and the application is consigned to record. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submits that suitable direction be issued in light of the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; decided on 07.10.2021 in S.L.P. No.5191 of 2021 with relation to enlargement on bail. 8. In the opinion of the Court, once a bail application is preferred then the same shall be considered with most expeditions strictly as per the law of the land without any delay. Order Date :- 12.3.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad