HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 31245 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge-sheet no. 409 of 2024 dated 23.12.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 28.02.2025 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah as well as entire criminal proceedings of Case no. 2767 of 2025 (State vs. Shivam Gupta) arising out of Case Crime no. 539 of 2024 under sections 351(2) B.N.S, PS- Kotwali Nagar, District Etah, pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah. 3. At the very outset, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been summoned vide order dated 28.2.2025 by learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah while taking cognizance of offence in pursuance to Section 351(2) B.N.S. Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that chargesheet has also been preferred only on the basis of the statement so recorded by the informant however, at the time of taking cognizance, the documents/reports submitted by concerned Investigating Officer which has been taken into consideration also discloses certain medical report which is highly irrelevant and as such the grounds so raised by the learned counsel for the applicant seems to be justified that the order dated 28.02.2025 passed by learned court concerned is without application of mind. 4. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer as made by learned counsel for the applicant but did not dispute that there is hardly any medical report available at the time of preferring charge sheet by concerned Investigating Officer and as such consideration of medical report as mentioned by learned court concerned is not a relevant one. 5. After considering the arguments so raised by learned counsel for the parties although, the arguments raised by learned counsel for Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Upendra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shivam Gupta .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) the applicant seems to be appreciable but at the same time it is also surprising in nature that under which circumstances the documents which were not appended alongwith charge sheet has been mentioned by learned court concerned at the time of taking cognizance while passing order dated 28.02.2025, it also put the order which is under challenge, under the category of cyclostyled or framed order which has already been prepared and likely to be used in all the other matters, there is hardly any relevancy of medical report which has been mentioned and observed by learned court concerned. 6. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, order dated 28.02.2025 is hereby set aside and learned court concerned is hereby directed to take fresh cognizance of offence, if required, in pursuance to charge sheet preferred by concerned Investigating Officer. 7. Application stands partly allowed. October 27, 2025 Rakesh NA528 No. 31245 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad