HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37585 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 as well as perused the material brought on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of the order dated 03.07.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj in Criminal Case No. 3803 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 244 of 2024, under Sections 189, 170, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 66 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Kannauj, whereby release application moved on behalf of the applicant has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for quashing of order dated 23.07.2025 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, District Kannauj, whereby revision moved on behalf of the applicant against the aforesaid order has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is the owner of two mobile phones of Apple Company and Infinix Company and that the said mobile phones in question in have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that no useful purpose would be served in keeping these two mobile phones at police station which would result in becoming junk. Learned counsel for the revisionist has relied upon a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat 2003 (46) A.C.C. 223 in support of his contention, in which it has been held that it is not desirable in the matter of motor vehicle, the vehicle be kept at the police station for a long time which result in the vehicle becoming junk, therefore, the vehicle-in- question should be released in favour of the registered owner on such terms and conditions as the court below may deem fit and proper. Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance upon the decision of this Court reported in 2012 (77) ACC 381 Shyam Singh Kushwaha Vs. State of U.P. and another, in support of his contention. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gopal Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) after perusing the orders impugned as well as averments made in the present application, this Court is of the opinion, that the arguments as raised by learned counsel for the applicant has substance. 5. Accordingly, both the impugned orders dated 03.07.2024 and 23.07.2025, are hereby set aside with the liberty to the applicant to file an appropriate application along with all relevant documents showing the ownership of those two mobiles phones, before the court concerned, and if such an application is filed within one month from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of one month, thereafter. 6. With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 528 BNS is finally disposed off. September 9, 2026 Mustaqeem. NA528 No. 37585 of 2026 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad