Smt Archana Tiwari And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
- Neutral2026:AHC:104781
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an application seeks to quash criminal proceedings at an interlocutory stage, the High Court will not exercise its power to quash where the material on record discloses that an offence is made out against the applicants, and the submissions relate to disputed questions of fact; such power to quash may be exercised only where there has been failure of justice or abuse of procedure, to prevent abuse of process and to secure the ends of justice. Where an applicant is not on bail and moves an application for bail before the Trial Court within a stipulated period after surrender or appearance through counsel, the Trial Court shall consider and dispose of the bail application expeditiously after affording opportunity to the other side. Where an applicant moves an application for discharge at an appropriate stage through counsel within a stipulated period, the Trial Court shall dispose of the discharge application by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a specified time thereafter. For a period specified by the High Court, or until disposal of a discharge application whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants in the criminal case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Lokesh Shukla, holding brief of Mr. Tarun Jha, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants has filed the recall application seeking recall of the order dated 13.04.2026 whereby the application was disposed of.
3. Cause shown in the affidavit for recall of the application is sufficient.
4. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the order dated 13.04.2026 is hereby recalled and the application be restored to its original number.
Order on Application u/s 528 BNSS
5. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding of the Criminal Case No. 33 of 2026 (State Vs. Akash Tiwari and others) in Case Crime No. 19 of 2025 under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351 (2) B.N.S. (Corresponding Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.) and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Jalaun and to quash the cognizance order dated 12.02.2026 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (Crime Against Women) Jalaun at Orai, in the above mentioned case and to quash the entire proceeding of charge sheet dated 30.12.2025 submitted by the Investigating Officer of the aforesaid Criminal Case.
6. 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 applicants. 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.
7. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.
8. In case, the applicants are not on bail, it is directed that if the applicants appear or surrender through counsel before the Trial Court and make 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.
9. However, in the interest of justice, it is further provided that in case the applicants move 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.
10. 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 applicants in the aforesaid case.
11. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of.
(Nand Prabha Shukla,J.)
May 6, 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