Ramkripal And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 August, 2025

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Ramkripal And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 August, 2025

Bench: Saurabh Srivastava





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:151710
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22893 of 2025   
 
   Ramkripal And 2 Others    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Patsy David, Sanju Lata   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 77
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard Ms. Sanju Lata, learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA for State.

2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the entire proceeding as well as charge sheet dated 25.07.2024 along with cognizance/summoning order dated 22.08.2024 in Criminal Case no. 3465 of 2024 (State vs. Ramkripal and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 337 of 2024 under Section 3/5(1) of U.P.Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, PS- Kant, District Shahjahanpur pending before the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, IIIrd, Court no. 15, Shahjahanpur.

3. While assailing entire proceeding in shape of charge sheet and cognizance order, it is contended by learned counsel for applicants that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. No independent witness has been examined by the Investigating Officer. No specific role has been assigned to the applicants. From perusal of FIR, it appears that there is no use of force, fraud or inducement on the part of the applicants hence present case does not come under the category of Section 2 of the U.P.Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2021, therefore the entire proceeding is liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application.

5. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, it is observed that prima facie it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The assertions of false implication raised by the applicants are factual issues that requires proper adjudication by the trial court based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 528 BNSS. In proceeding u/s 528 BNSS, this Court is not inclined to hold mini-trial.

6. It is well settled that the inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, primarily to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, no sufficient ground have been made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 BNSS. 7. In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 528 BNSS is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.) August 27, 2025 Shaswat

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court