HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14643 of 2026 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Vinay Saran, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Hariom Kamal Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsel assisted by Sri Ravi Anand Agarwal, learned counsel for opposite party no.2. 2. At the very outset, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of applicants submits that one section has been wrongly transcribed at the time of preparing instant application and as such he may be granted permission to correct the same. 3. Prayer as made is hereby allowed. 4. Let necessary correction be carried out in the prayer clause of instant application by learned counsel for the applicants during the course of day. 5. The instant application has been preferred for challenging the charge- sheet dated 05.10.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 18.02.2026 and the entire proceedings of Case No.3848 of 2026 (State vs. Moon Goyal and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.255 of 2025, under sections 316(5), 336, 338, 61(2) BNS, P.S. Sikandara, District- Agra, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra. 6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants submits that the allegation which has been fastened against applicant no.3 that he has executed registered sale deed in favour of applicant nos.1 and 2 for the same property, which has been mortgaged before Uttar Pradesh Housing and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hariom Kamal Singh, Varad Nath Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Bharat Bhushan Paul, G.A., Ravi Anand Agarwal, Saurabh Paul Satish Kumar Goyal And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Development Board and once the property which was under the mortgage, it is opposite party no.2, i.e., Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development Board having first charge over the property and without taking consent or proper permission, the same property cannot be transferred by way of executing sale deed at the behest of applicant no.3 in favour of applicant nos.1 and 2. 7. By bare perusal of mortgage deed provided by learned counsel for opposite party no.2, it is crystal clear that although name of applicant no.3 is not available in the mortgage deed, but the various person on behalf of company, i.e., M/s Bharat Nagar Housing entered as one of the party in the mortgage deed at the behest of company in which applicant no.3 is one of the directors and the same facts has not been disputed by learned counsel for the applicants also. 8. 8. So far as applicant nos.1 and 2 is concerned, they are only the purchasers of the property which was mortgaged before opposite party no.2 and there was hardly any entry available in the revenue records in pursuance to mortgaged and as such the after effect of registered sale deed executed in favour of applicant nos.1 and 2 will be subject matter of legal recourse whatsoever lies in favour of opposite party no.2, but so far as in respect of allegation as fastened at the behest of opposite party no.2 by way of lodging FIR registered at Case Crime No.255 of 2025, under sections 316(5), 336, 338, 61(2) BNS, the same are not attracted in respect of applicant nos.1 and 2, since they are under the capacity of bona fide on the basis of entries available in record. 9. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that implication of applicant nos.1 and 2 in respect of cognizance of offence taken up by learned court concerned vide order dated 18.02.2026 over the charge-sheet dated 05.10.2025 is not at all maintainable and the same is bad in the eye of law. 10. In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, the entire proceedings in shape of Case No.3848 of 2026 (State vs. Moon Goyal and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.255 of 2025, under sections 316(5), 336, 338, 61(2) BNS, P.S. Sikandara, District- Agra, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, including charge-sheet dated 05.10.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated 18.02.2026 are hereby set-aside only in respect of applicant nos.1 and 2. NA528 No. 14643 of 2026 2 11. So far as applicant no.3 is concerned, liberty is hereby extended in his favour to put his appearance before learned court concerned in pursuance to cognizance/summoning order dated 18.02.2026 within a period of one month from today. Till the period extended above, no coercive action shall be initiated against applicant no.3. It is also directed to learned court concerned that if the applicant no.3 preferred bail application at the time of appearance within stipulated time as mentioned above, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. 12. Accordingly, the instant application u/s 528 BNSS is partly allowed and all the pending applications filed in this application u/s 528 BNSS stands disposed of. May 7, 2026 Saif NA528 No. 14643 of 2026 3 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad