NA528/18816/2026 of CHANDRAKESH Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18816 of 2026 Court No. - 80 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State perused the record. 2. This application has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceeding of Session Trial No. 1195 of 2026 (State vs. Chandrakesh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 136 of 2025, under Sections 61(2)Ka, 103(1) BNS, Police Station Rajpura, District Sambhal as well as order dated 7.8.2025 pending before Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No. 1, Moradabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the proceeding initiated against the applicant is illegal and against the material available on record; the material of investigation does not disclose commission of any alleged offences against the applicant and as such the proceedings initiated against the applicant including the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order are liable to be quashed by this court. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the first information report was lodged by applicant/informant Chandrakesh against five known persons and two unknown persons but they were exonerated in this case and the applicant has been made accused only on the strength of statements of two witnesses, namely, Ratan Singh and Smt. Sushila. Witness Ratan Singh stated that the applicant made extra judicial confession and similar statement was made by Sushila, who happens to be wife of the co-accused Dharmendra. It is further submitted Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhyan Shanker Pandey, Vishal Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chandrakesh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) that there is no evidence in this case except the extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession is a very weak evidence and no other evidence was recorded against the applicant except extra judicial confession. Therefore, the proceedings against the applicant be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for applicant by way of submitting that the averments whatsoever has been raised by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of trial and submitted that after considering the material available on record, charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant upon which learned court concerned has rightly taken cognizance and summoned the applicant. It is further submitted that extra judicial confession was made by the applicant and the charge may be framed on strong suspicion. In this matter, the applicant Chandrakesh lodged the first information report against several other persons and this is a matter of honour killing, where death penalty may be awarded by the trial court if the convincing evidence is adduced. There are sufficient evidence to proceed against the present applicant. 5. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties and by bare perusal of record, there appears to be no illegality and impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order and as such learned court concerned has rightly proceeded against the applicant and this Court cannot appreciate the evidence at this stage. 6. In view thereof, the instant application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. 7. It is open that the applicant may move discharge application before the trial court, who shall pass order in accordance with law. May 6, 2026 A.P. Pandey NA528 No. 18816 of 2026 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad