MAHENDRA SINGH YADAV AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
NA528/24326/2025 · 2025-10-13
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 191930 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 191930 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24326 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and Sri Awadh Raj Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Shailesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA appearing for the State.
2. This present application has been filed for seeking quashing of chargesheet dated 10.07.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 13.05.2025 and entire proceeding of Case No.1436 of 2025 (State Vs. Mahendra Singh Yadav and others), arising out of Case Crime No.77 of 2024, under Section 406, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kasimabad, District Ghazipur, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Ghazipur.
3. On perusal of the entire material available on record in shape of impugned order and chargesheet along with other documents, this Court does not find it to be a case where interference of this Court is required. No such ground appears to be available in the present application, on the basis of which, impugned order and chargesheet along with entire criminal proceedings of the said case, can be set aside.
4. Accordingly, the prayer sought through the instant application, is refused.
5. Lastly, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that liberty may be granted to applicants to surrender before the court concerned and apply for bail to which learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA have no objection.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the instant application is finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that in case, the applicants surrender before the court concerned within a period of four weeks from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Rajak Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shailesh Kumar Yadav Mahendra Singh Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
expeditiously in accordance with law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825).
7. However, it is made clear that till four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants herein in pursuance of aforesaid case. October 14, 2025 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 24326 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad