Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84505 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6476 of 2025 Applicant :- Baldeo Alias Virendra Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Salman Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijay Singh Rathore Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 BNSS has been preferred with the following prayer :- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 03.12.2024 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Jalaun at Orai in S.T. No.49/2022 (State v. Rakesh and others) and the impugned order dated 29.01.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Orai in Criminal Transfer Application No.30/2021 (Roop Singh v. Rakesh and others) arising out of Complaint Case No.2051/2013 (Roop Singh v. Rakesh and others) under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 504, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kalpi, District- Jalaun and remit the above noted case to its original jurisdiction i.e., Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai from the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Jalaun at Orai." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that impugned orders are against law and facts and thus, liable to be set aside. It was stated that regarding an incident dated 01.08.2013 which took place at 5.00 PM, father of applicant has lodged a First Information Report against opposite party no.2 and his associates vide Crime No.742/2013 under Sections 324, 323, 504, 506 IPC and in that matter, after investigation charge-sheet was submitted. As the said case was triable by Court of Sessions thus, it was committed to the Court of Sessions and it was registered as S.T. No. 173/2013. Meanwhile, the opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC regarding incident dated 01.08.2013, which took place at 6.00 PM, as a cross case and said application was registered as a complaint case. In that matter applicant and others were summoned for offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 504, 504, 506 IPC. It was stated that the application was filed by opposite party no.2 for committal of said case to the Court of Sessions by treating the same as a counter-case of S.T. No.173 of 2013, was rejected. Later, the opposite party no.2 has filed a transfer application before Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Orai, which has been allowed vide impugned order dated 29.01.2022 and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai was directed to commit the Complaint Case No.2052 of 2013, lodged by the opposite party no.2, to the Court of Sessions. Learned counsel submitted that while both the cases were pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Jalaun at Orai, the applicant has filed an application alleging that the said case was committed to the Court of Sessions on the basis of false facts but that application was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Jalaun at Orai vide impugned order dated 03.12.2024. Learned counsel has referred facts of the matter and submitted that both the impugned orders are against law and thus, liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. So far as the impugned order dated 29.01.2022 is concerned, by that order, learned Sessions Judge has allowed the transfer application filed by opposite party no.2 and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai was directed to commit the Complaint Case No.2052/2013 to the Court of Sessions. Learned Sessions Judge has observed that on the basis of reports of the Presiding Officers of both the concerned courts, where the State case and the complaint case were pending, it appears that complaint case is cross case of the State case S.T. No.173/2013/. Merely because in the complaint case the incident has been mentioned of 6.00 PM whereas in State case the time of incident was mentioned at 5.00 PM, it could not be said that impugned order dated 29.01.2022 is suffering from any patent illegality or perversity. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of process of the Court of miscarriage of justice. Further, the said order was passed on 29.01.2022 and it is being challenged under Section 528 BNSS after a period of three years. This application 528 BNSS against order dated 29.01.2022 is suffering from vice of delay and laches on the part of the applicant. Considering the entire facts, no case for interference in impugned order dated 29.01.2022 is made out. 7. As far as order dated 03.12.2024 is concerned, by that order the application filed by applicant to the effect that the said complaint case be sent back to the Court of Magistrate, was rejected. As the said complaint case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Jalaun by the Sessions Judge while passing an order on transfer application, thus, it cannot be said that the order dated 03.12.2024 is suffering from any material illegality or perversity. 8. In view of the aforesaid, it is clear that no case of invoking powers under Section 528 BNSS is made out. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merit and thus, liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the application under Section 528 BNSS is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 19.5.2025/ Rama Kant Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad