Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30742 (ALL)

RAJAN v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/8941/2025 · 2025-03-19

Vikas Budhwar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40557 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8941 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri S.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 528 BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the proceeding of Complaint Case No. 141 of 2025 (Roop Kishor Vs. Rajan), Under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and Under Section Prohibition Station-Bewar, Act, 4 Dowry Police District-Mainpuri pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No.3, Mainpuri and summoning order dated 01.12.2014 passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a complaint stood lodged against the applicant who happens to be husband of the daughter of O.P. No.2 and the allegation is with regard to the commission of offences under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and under Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. He submits that no such offence has been committed. Further contention is that no date was fixed in the application under Section 156(3) CrPC. 4. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that whatever might be, the summoning order is dated 01.12.2014 and prima facie, the offences stand made out. 5. Having heard the arguments made across the Bar, the Court is of the opinion that the summoning order has been issued on 01.12.2014 and the present application has been preferred in the year 2025. Even otherwise, this Court finds that prima facie the offences are made out and the case is liable to be tried and given a logical end. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant seeks a direction for bail in view the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51. In case, in the opinion of the Court, once the application is preferred for seeking bail, then this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be decided decided with most expedition strictly in accordance with the law of the land. 6. In view of above, the application is consigned to record. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad