Rohtash And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 2225 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Rohtash And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 June, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:95451
 
Court No. - 52
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18517 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Rohtash And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Sharma,Saurabh Kumar
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Amir Khan (AoR No. A/A 0541/2012) holding brief of Sri Hemant Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State.

2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 12.10.2022 in Complaint Case No. 7723 of 2021, under Sections 379, 504 IPC, Police Station-Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, District Ghaziabad.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a first information report was lodged by the opposite party no. 2 on 02.12.2018 against the applicants under Sections 506, 504, 427, 380, 457 IPC, Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, with an allegation that the applicants herein are engaged in a work of pressing the clothes. Further allegation is that the opposite party no. 2 had purchased a plot and when the opposite party no. 2 requested the applicants to remove their Kiosk from the entrance, then the applicants administered threat and also committed offence of robbery while taking away the valuables and also dislodged the name plates and further threatened that in case any action is taken by the opposite party no. 2, then the applicant no. 2 would cause aspersion of commission of bad acts. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that thorough investigation, a final report came to be submitted, thereafter, a protest petition came to be filed and the case was transformed into a complaint case, post recording of statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the applicants have been summoned on 12.10.2022 under Sections 379, 504 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and further the applicants have some dispute with the Electricity Department and no such event or occurrence was there.

4. Learned State Law Officer, who appears for the State submits that what is to be seen, at this stage, is being statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. vis-a-vis the allegations in the complaint. Once, there is no material contradiction then this Court may not interfere at this stage.

5. Having heard the submissions so made across the bar, this Court finds that prima facie offenses are made out as per the allegations contained therein. What would be the actual status of truth is a question which is subject matter of trial as the Court is not required to delve into the said factual issues. Moreover, the statements of the witnesses sticks to and support the prosecution theory as propounded in the complaint. Accordingly, no case is made out and the application is consigned to record.

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submits that suitable direction be issued in light of the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; decided on 07.10.2021 in S.L.P. No.5191 of 2021 with relation to enlargement on bail.

7. In the opinion of the Court, once a bail application is preferred then the same shall be considered with most expeditions strictly as per the law of the land without any delay.

Order Date :- 5.6.2025

Brijesh