HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22014 of 2025 Court No. - 92 HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the Sate-respondents and perused the material available on record. 2. Instant application under Section 528 BNSS, has been filed by the applicant with prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 12.01.2024 as well as cognizance order in Case No.665 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.785 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Gujraula District Amroha, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR in the present case was lodged at the instance of Rajendra Pratap Singh against six named accused persons, chargesheet has been filed against five accused persons only, the complicity of named accused Divyanshu son of Subhash Singh, was not found during investigation and his name is dropped in chargesheet. He next submitted that in FIR it is stated by the informant that accused Sandeep son of Mahendra has assaulted his aunt Nirvesh by a rod on her hand, due to which she suffered fracture. However, the injured Nirvesh has stated in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that संजय पुत्र पप्पू राम ने मेरे संगीता के िपता प्रताप िसह के िसर पर लोहे के रॉड से वार िकया था. This statement suggests that Sanjay had assaulted both by rod, the injured Pratap Singh as well as Smt. Nirvesh, which does not correspond to FIR version. 4. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The learned Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dr. Kamlesh Kumar, Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sandeep .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 345, 323, 504, 506 IPC without application of mind on the basis of said chargesheet. No fracture was found in X-ray report of any of the injured. 5. Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that in the present case injured Pratap Singh suffered three head injuries, however, no fracture was found in X-ray of skull. Injured Sangeeta also suffered lacerated wound on her head which is which is caused skull deep. Injured Smt. Nirvesh suffered one injury on left forearm; injured Km. Rewati suffered lacerated wound on her forehead; and injured Smt. Rajjawate suffered complaint of pain; injured Deepanshu suffered two lacerated wounds on head. However, in X-ray report of Smt. Nirvesh no bone injury was found. 6. As the accused who has been named in FIR and on the said FIR a cognizable offencce is made out against applicant and co-accused. His complicity has been shown in the statement of every injured person, this is a case of form a unlawful assembly and in which a case of commission of any offence provision of Section 149 IPC is applicable. Therefore, in my considered opinion, no case is made out to quash the chargesheet or proceedings of the court below on the basis of grounds taken in present petition. 7. However, the applicant is at liberty to move discharge application through counsel within two months from today before the trial court, in which he may raise the grounds taken in the present petition as well as any other ground which is available under law, and in case any such application is being filed, the same shall be heard and decided expeditiously, after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order. 8. Till the aforesaid period of two months and during pendency of discharge application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. 9. In case of failure on the part of applicant in moving the discharge application(s) within the aforesaid period, he will not be entitled to the benefit of this order. NA528 No. 22014 of 2025 2 10. With above directions this application stands disposed of. September 17, 2025 Ashish/- NA528 No. 22014 of 2025 3 (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad