Rashid Akhtar vs State Of U.P. And Another
- Neutral2026:AHC:106032
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The power to quash a charge-sheet and cognizance order under Section 528 BNSS is exercisable only where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of procedure, and not merely on disputed questions of fact which must be adjudicated upon by the Trial Court. Where an applicant has not surrendered or appeared before the Trial Court, if the applicant appears or surrenders through counsel and makes an application for bail within 45 days from the date of the order, the bail application shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously after giving opportunity to the State. Where an applicant moves an application for discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel within 45 days, the Trial Court shall dispose of the same by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter. For a period of 45 days or till the disposal of a discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. Heard Mr. Udai Prakash Deo Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to allow the instant application and set aside/quash the Charge-sheet dated 02.11.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 09.07.2025 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, District-Varanasi in Case No. 32256 of 2025, State of U.P. Vs. Rashid Akhtar and others arising out of Case Crime No. 241 of 2024 under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 79 ?.N.S. & Section 67A ?.?. Act, Police Station-Sigra District-Varanasi by which the learned Magistrate summoned the Applicant for offence under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 79 B.N.S. and Section 67A I.T. Act as well as quash the entire proceeding of the aforesaid Case.
3. 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. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or abuse of procedure, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process to secure the ends of justice.
4. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.
5. In case, the applicant is not on bail, it is directed that if the applicant appears or surrenders through counsel before the Trial Court and makes an application for bail within 45 days from the date of the order, the same shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously, after giving opportunity to the other side.
6. However, in the interest of justice, it is further provided that in case the applicant moves an application for discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel within 45 days, the same shall be disposed of by the Trial Court by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter.
7. For a period of 45 days or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
8. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
May 7, 2026
Shivani Sri.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free