Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 189181 (ALL)

BHOLA RAM v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/3835/2025 · 2025-02-06

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:18323 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 3835 of 2025 Applicant :- Bhola Ram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Shri Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vikash Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State-respondent. 2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 2296 of 2024 (State Vs. Harendra and others), arising out of case crime no. 188 of 2024, under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 115(2), 352, 351 (3), 76, 105 BNSS Act, Police Station- Fatehabad, District Agra pending before the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court no. 16, Agra. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a first information report stood lodged against six named accused and 14- 15 un-named accused with relation to administering of beating and also commission of the offences. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a discharge application has also been rejected and, according to him, he was not named as an accused in the FIR, however, he was simply a labour and the only role assigned to him, which can be attributed is that he was just standing being on looker to the entire thing and he is innocent in this regard. 4. Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that may be, his name did not place in the first information report as an accused, however, from the perusal of the statement of Banu Pratap, the first informant, it was specifically pointed out that the applicant was present and he was also one of the assailants in that regard. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. In the opinion of the Court, factual inquiries cannot be gone into the present proceedings, particularly, when the name of the statement stands surfaced in the statement of the opposite party no. 2 specifically assigning him also a role in administering beating. Further the injured also succumbed to death due to cardiac arrest. 6. Accordingly, the present application stands consigned to record. Order Date :- 7.2.2025 A. Prajapati Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad