Sunil Sharma And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
- Neutral2026:AHC:105994
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The power to quash a cognizance order and summons under Section 528 BNSS should not be exercised at an interlocutory stage merely on the basis of disputed questions of fact; such power is confined to cases where there has been a failure of justice or abuse of procedure, and its exercise must be directed towards preventing abuse of process and securing the ends of justice. Where an applicant seeks bail and is not currently on bail, if the applicant appears or surrenders through counsel before the Trial Court and makes a bail application within 45 days, the Trial Court is obliged to consider and dispose of such application expeditiously after affording opportunity to the other side. Where an applicant moves a discharge application within 45 days, the Trial Court must dispose of such application by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks of receipt of the application. For a period of 45 days or until disposal of a discharge application, whichever occurs earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against applicants in the underlying case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. Heard Mr. Gajendra Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for the applicants, 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 quash the entire Cognizance Order dated 02.02.2022, summoning dated 29.03.2022 as well as N.B.W. dated 19.06.2024 of Charge Sheet dated 05.04.2021 in Case No. 5775 of 2022 State Versus Sunil Sharma and other, under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Ghaziabad arising out of Case Crime No. 278 of 2019, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Fast Track Court -1 (Atrocities Against women) Ghaziabad.
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 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.
4. Accordingly, prayer for quashing is declined.
5. 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.
6. 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.
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 applicants 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