Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89758 (ALL)

ISHANT PRATAP SINGH SENGAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/32245/2025 · 2025-09-16

Saurabh Srivastava

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32245 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash entire proceedings of Case no. 11678/2024 (State vs. Ishant Pratap Singh) as well as charge sheet no. 546/2022 dated 29.7.2022 arising out of Case Crime no. 875/2021 under sections 295A, 501 IPC and section 72A of Information Technology (Amended) Act, 2008, PS- Auraiya, District Auraiya and cognizance order dated 4.9.2024. 3. On previous occasion, vide order dated 3.9.2025, learned AGA has been granted time to seek instructions over the issue that "whether the messages or the material which has been endorsed under para no. 4 of the Case Diary has ever been certified by the competent authority under the provisions or not especially under Section 63(4) of Indian Evidence Act, since arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant cannot be proceeded for trial in absence of any certificate issued by competent authority over the item in shape of message/post generated through the electronic device pertains to the applicant. The basis for seeking instruction is also that the authority concerned has not been made witness at the time of filing charge sheet." 4. In pursuance to order dated 3.09.2025, learned AGA came up with the instructions that the message and electronic device pertains to applicant only so far as regarding the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant that specific provisions under Section 63(4) of Indian Evidence Act, has not been complied with is concerned, the same ground is amenable before learned trial court and only on the basis of the specific argument the entire proceeding cannot be set aside. 5. However, applicant will be at liberty to prefer discharge application Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramesh Kumar Singh, Utpal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ishant Pratap Singh Sengar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) before learned court concerned through counsel on the ground so raised through the instant application and the same shall be considered and decided by way of disclosing the reasons for arriving upon conclusion and finding so recorded in respect of the disposal of the discharge application. 6. The instant application u/s 528 BNSS stands disposed of accordingly. September 17, 2025 Shaswat NA528 No. 32245 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad