Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41691 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 22.09.2024, cognizance order dated 26.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Fatehpur in Criminal Case No. 24878 of 2024 (State Vs. Rajaram), arising out of Case Crime No. 177 of 2024, under Sections 182, 200, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Hathgaon, District Fatehpur. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. 4. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves adjudication of a factual dispute and appraisal of evidence. 5. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 BNSS. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar, Ashish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajaram .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
6. This Court in exercise of its power under Section 528 BNSS is not required to assess the correctness of the allegations and reliability of evidence. Thus, the prayer for quashing is refused. 7. The present application lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed. 8. Dismissed accordingly. September 29, 2026 Mustaqeem.
NA528 No. 41691 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad