Allahabad High Court
Gagan Agrawal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 July, 2025
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111538 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24236 of 2025 Applicant :- Gagan Agrawal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. The present application has been preferred challenging chargesheet no.206/2024 dated 05.12.2024 and cognizance as well as summoning order dated 03.04.2025 along with entire proceedings of Case No.3074 of 2025 (State Vs. Pinki Dhama and others), arising out of Case Crime No.216 of 2024, under Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Ganganahar, District Meerut, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Meerut.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and his name was surfaced during investigation conducted by the concerned Investigating Officer inCase Crime No.216 of 2024, under Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Ganganahar, District Meerut. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that the trail of the massage covered the different mobile numbers out of which, one pertains to applicant also but in the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she herself stated that the alleged massage was sent by herself to the applicant and later on the same was deleted without sending anyone and as such, no case is made out against applicant for commission of offence under Section 67 of I.T. Act. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that implication of applicant being doctor of a clinic who is somehow related to the informant on the basis of her services which was rendered by her before the same clinic, also cannot be a ground for implicating him in the present case and as such, entire proceedings of the present case, may be liable to be quashed.
4. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer sought through the instant application but could not dispute the fact that there is hardly any allegation against the applicant for transmitting the massage or publishing the same.
5. After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties, it is apparent that applicant has never transmitted or published the massage to anyone and moreso, in the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she herself stated that the alleged massage was sent by herself to the applicant and later on the same was deleted without sending anyone and as such, no case is made out against applicant for commission of offence under Section 67 of I.T. Act.
6. In view thereof, chargesheet no.206/2024 dated 05.12.2024 and cognizance as well as summoning order dated 03.04.2025 along with entire proceedings of Case No.3074 of 2025 (State Vs. Pinki Dhama and others), arising out of Case Crime No.216 of 2024, under Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Ganganahar, District Meerut, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Meerut, are hereby quashed qua to the applicant only.
7. Accordingly, the instant application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Vivek Kr.