Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 186443 (ALL)

TRIBHUVAN KORI @ LALA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

NA528/1957/2025 · 2025-12-05

Saurabh Lavania

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. - 1957 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "The petitioner named above most respectfully begs to submit that for the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Petition Under Section 528 B.N.S.S And 482 CRPC for quashing of the entire proceeding on basis of cognizance order dated 21/08/2025 Passed by Learned Court CJM Sultanpur and pending at Learned Court ASJ/FTC-2 Sultanpur in Criminal Case. NO. 1135/2025 on the basis of Charge-sheet filed under sections 310(4)/310(5)/61(2) BNS-2023 and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Sultanpur, dated 20/08/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 509/2025, under sections 310(4)/310(5)/61(2) BNS-2023 and 3/25 Arms Act, dated 23/06/2025 Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District - Sultanpur, Styled As (State Vs Manoj & others) Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Sultanpur, A true Certify Copies of cognizance order dated 21/08/2025 and Charge sheet dated 20/08/2025 are being annexed as herewith as Annexure No.1 and 2. To this petition, so far it relates to the present Petitioner. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly also be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, pending before the Learned Court ASJ/FTC-2 Sultanpur in regard to present petitioner." 3. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that without acceding the main prayer(s) sought in the application, the instant application may be dismissed with liberty to applicant to prefer discharge application, which may be directed to be decided by the court concerned most expeditiously. 4. To the aforesaid, there is no objection. 5. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed with liberty as prayed for. December 5, 2025 Harshita. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Gopal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Tribhuvan Kori @ Lala .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench