Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 182203 (ALL)

SHREERAM ALIAS SHREERAM MAURYA AND 4 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

NA528/1552/2025 · 2025-11-03

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1552 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s) and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present application has been preferred by the applicant with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 05.09.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur in Case No. 1087 of 2025 as well as charge sheet dated 25.07.2025 filed under Sections- 110, 118(1), 351(3), 3(5) BNS, Police Station- Baldirai, District- Sultanpur as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1087 of 2025. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant(s) submitted that at this stage, he is confining his prayer to seek the benefit of the judgment(s) passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 for which liberty may be given to the applicant(s) and liberty may also be given to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again at appropriate stage for seeking appropriate relief. 4. Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant(s). 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for. 6. Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (Supra) , this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today, they would not take any coercive action against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case. It is made clear that in this regard, no application shall be entertained. November 3, 2025 Arun/- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shesh Mani Shukla, Arvind Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Shreeram Alias Shreeram Maurya And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench