Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72347 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6555 of 2025 Applicant :- Virendra Gupta And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Shanker Tripathi,Vinod Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Vijai Shanker Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Mr. P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 23.06.2023 along with Cognizance order dated 03.08.2023 and the entire proceeding of Case No.26969 of 2023 (State vs. Virendra Gupta and Others), arising out of Case Crime No.400 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Firozabad North, District- Firozabad, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad. Brief facts of the case are that an FIR has been lodged by opposite party no.2 on 02.06.2023 at 10:45 hours, under Sections 147, 452, 427, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. against three named accused and 8 to 10 unknown persons with the allegations that the named accused persons came along with 8 to 10 unknown persons and forcefully entered the shop of opposite party no.2 where they misbehaved with her as well as her daughter-in-law and abused them. It has also been mentioned that several litigation are pending between the both the parties regarding property dispute. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and the applicants have been summoned. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier a will deed was executed by Bhola Nath (grandfather of opposite party no.2) mentioning therein that the entire property shall be given to the trust, however, in case any family member is adopted, the property may be given to them. In such circumstances, daughter-in-law of Bhola Nath (i.e. mother of opposite party no.2) executed a registered adoption deed, adopting applicant no.3 has her son. The property was claimed accordingly by applicant no.3. He further submits that civil litigation are pending, wherein two civil suits have been filed from the side of the applicants wherein injunction orders have been passed. The present case has been lodged in order to exert pressure upon the applicants, however, the share as per the will deed executed by Vimla Devi in the year 2012, in favour of opposite party no.2 has already been given. He further contends that no such incident has taken place as there are variations in the statement of first informant from the version of the FIR. In her statement, she has denied of any misbehaviour with the daughter- in-law or being assaulted by the applicants. He further submits that no offence under the relevant sections has been made out against the applicants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. Per contra, learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that there is no illegality in the cognizance and summoning order and as per the version of the FIR and the statements of the charge sheet witnesses, prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made by the counsel for the applicants, relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 B.N.S.S. While hearing the matter, this Court raised several queries regarding death of husband of Vimla Devi i.e. father of opposite party no.2 and no documents have been produced showing that the adoption deed is legal. Learned counsel for the applicants could not answer the query of the Court as to what was the occasion of filing a second suit when injunction order was already in favour of the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants also could not give any satisfactory answers to the aforesaid queries. After advancing his arguments at some length, learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants want to apply for discharge at this stage and they may be permitted to move appropriate application for discharge under B.N.S.S. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is hereby provided that if the applicants move an application for discharge before the concerned Court below within three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law by means of a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of one month from the date making of discharge application without granting any adjournment in the matter. For the period of two months or till the disposal of application for discharge, if moved by the applicants, whichever is earlier, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants pursuant to the criminal proceedings in question. However, it is made clear that this relief is a one time measure being afforded to the applicants so far the interim protection is concerned as he has come with a bona fide prayer for discharge and if they fail to move an appropriate application as directed herein above the interim protection shall stand discharged and the court below shall proceeded in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present 528 B.N.S.S. application is disposed of. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Kalp Nath Singh Digitally signed by :- KALP NATH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad