Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 81108 (ALL)

GAJENDRA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

NA528/28290/2025 · 2025-09-24

Yogesh Dubey Joint Registrar Judicial

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 28290 of 2025 Court No. - 89 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Mahendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State. 2. The present application u/s 528 of BNSS has been filed with prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 1320 of 2023 (State Vs. Gajendra), arising out of Case Crime No.167 of 2023, under Sections 376-A, B of IPC and Section 5m/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Sarurpur, District Meerut as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 09.07.2025, pending in the Court of learned Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court No.3, Meerut. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the application filed by the applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the remaining witnesses of the fact in the charge sheet, namely, Dinesh, Dipanshu,Ram Singh, Dushyant, Komal and Sudhir has been rejected by the learned trial Court. It is further submitted that the evidence of the above witnesses of the fact is required for just decision of the case. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA submits that the order passed by the learned trial Court is just and proper as the learned trial Court has not found the evidence of the above named witnesses, which is required for arriving at just decision of the case. 5. On perusal of the order impugned, it appears that the learned trial Court has rejected the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant on the ground that the evidence already recorded is sufficient and there is no requirement of summoning the said witnesses for arriving at just decision of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahendra Kumar Yadav, Swapnil, Vijeta Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gajendra .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) the case. 6. Keeping in view of the above, there is no abuse of the process of the Court has been occasioned by the order impugned. 7. The application U/s 528 BNSS lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the application U/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. September 25, 2025 RKM NA528 No. 28290 of 2025 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad