# Vijendra Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors - **Citation:** (2026) 1 ILRA 13 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2026-01-27 - **Case number:** Application U/S 528 BNSS. No. 36420 of 2025 - **Bench:** Avnish Saxena - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/vijendra-kumar-v-state-of-u-p-ors-54011 - **Pages:** 5 ## Text 1 All. Vijendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. 13 18. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Damu Khare (supra) has dealt in paragraph no. 28 that the continued physical relations on false promise of marriage with no protest, which continued for years takes out the sting of criminal culpability. The relevant paragraph is reiterated underneath:- "28. Moreover, even if it is assumed that a false promise of marriage was made to the complainant initially by the appellant, even though no such cogent evidence has been brought on record before us to that effect, the fact that the relationship continued for nine long years, would render the plea of the complainant that her consent for all these years was under misconception of fact that the Appellant would marry her implausible. Consequently, the criminal liability attached to such false promise would be diluted after such a long passage of time and in light of the fact that no protest was registered by the complainant during all those years. Such a prolonged continuation of physical relationship without demurral or remonstration by the female partner, in effect takes out the sting of criminal culpability and neutralises it." 19. Thus, at no stretch of imagination, considering the material on record, particularly the allegations made in the FIR, the statement made by the victim recorded under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS, there is any criminal act committed by accused applicant no. 1 which requires to be tried, as is discussed here-in-above. So far as the trial of accused applicant nos. 2 & 3 are concern, the same is not having any material available on record except the statement of the victim and allegations made in the FIR. 20. Hence, the application under Section 528 BNSS is allowed. Consequently, the charge sheet dated 30.03.2025, cognizance taking order dated 22.05.2025 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1, Aligarh and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 419 of 2025 (State Vs. Jitendra Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 55/2025, under Sections 69 and 351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Gandhi Park, District- Aligarh, is quashed. ---------- (2026) 1 ILRA 13 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 27.01.2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. Application U/S 528 BNSS. No. 36420 of 2025 Vijendra Kumar ...Applicant Versus State of U.P. & Ors. ...Opposite Parties Issue for consideration Mandatory compliance of Section 230 B.N.S.S. Headnotes 14 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023-sec 230-framing of charge by the trial court- without the mandatory compliance of Section 230 B.N.S.S.-mandates that the copy of police report and other documents shall be provided to the accused-applicant - non-compliance of Section 230 B.N.S.S.-further proceedings of the case and framing of the charge in contravention to the legal provision -violation of the cardinal principle of free and fair trial-charge framed liable to be quashed-to give way to the accused for moving of discharge applicationApplication allowed. (E-9) Case Law Cited Nil List of Acts Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 List of Keywords Copy of police report, Section 230 B.N.S.S Appearances of parties Counsel for Applicant(s) : Divyanshu Pathak, Hemant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Delivered by Hon'ble Avnish Saxena, J.) 1. Learned A.G.A. has filed the counter affidavit. Sri Shive Datta Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.4 appears and files vakalatnama as well as the counter affidavit. The same are taken on record. 2. Sri Divyanshu Pathak, learned counsel for the accused-applicant appears and submits that he does not want to file rejoinder affidavit in reply to the counter affidavit filed by the State as well as the opposite party no.4. He submits that sole ground of moving the present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is the framing of charge by the trial court without the mandatory compliance of Section 230 B.N.S.S., which mandates that the copy of police report and other documents shall be provided to the accused-applicant and further submits that the order of taking cognizance dated 06.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, Etawah in Special Case No.22 of 2025 (State of U.P. Vs. Vijendra Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No.111 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 352, 65(1) B.N.S. and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act as well as Sections 3(1)Dha, 3(2)5 of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Usarahar District Etawah, has not made any mention in the order that the copies be provided to the accused-applicant. He further submits that Sections 261 and 262 of B.N.S.S. provides for an opportunity of accused to move the discharge application and provides a limitation for the same, whereas, the trial court without providing the documents and the copy of police report to the accused-applicant has fixed the date for framing of charge and therefore, has not complied the mandatory provisions of the Act. Hence, seeks interference of this Court. 3. Sri Shive Datte Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.4 and learned A.G.A. for the State have stated that the trial court has provided the copies of police papers and documents, which has been received by the accused-applicant on the margin of the order shown at page no.95 of the application. Both of them have stated that the order dated 06.01.2025 shows that the court has taken cognizance in the presence of the accused on 06.01.2025 and sufficient time was provided to the accused to move the discharge application, but has not been moved by the accused, which led to the framing of charge on 04.04.2025. Further submits that the applicant has belatedly 1 All. Vijendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. 15 moved the present application and therefore, the application is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. 4. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by the parties and perused the record. 5. Section 230 B.N.S.S. provides that the court concerned shall provide the copies of documents and police papers relied on by the prosecution not beyond 14 days from the date of production or appearance of the accused. The provision of Section 230 B.N.S.S. is reiterated underneath:- "Section 230. Supply to accused of copy of police report and other documents. In any case where the proceeding has been instituted on a police report, the Magistrate shall without delay, and in no case beyond fourteen days from the date of production or appearance of the accused, furnish to the accused and the victim (if represented by an advocate) free of cost, a copy of each of the following:? (i) the police report; (ii) the first information report recorded under section 173; (iii) the statements recorded under sub-section (3) of section 180 of all persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses, excluding therefrom any part in regard to which a request for such exclusion has been made by the police officer under sub-section (7) of section 193; (iv) the confessions and statements, if any, recorded under section 183; (v) any other document or relevant extract thereof forwarded to the Magistrate with the police report under sub-section (6) of section 193; Provided that the Magistrate may, after perusing any such part of a statement as is referred to in clause (iii) and considering the reasons given by the police officer for the request, direct that a copy of that part of the statement or of such portion thereof as the Magistrate thinks proper, shall be furnished to the accused; Provided further that if the Magistrate is satisfied that any such document is voluminous, he shall, instead of furnishing the accused and the victim (if represented by an advocate) with a copy thereof, may furnish the copies through electronic means or direct that he will only be allowed to inspect it either personally or through an advocate in Court; Provided also that supply of documents in electronic form shall be considered as duly furnished." 16 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES 6. The charge sheet dated 13.12.2024 is submitted before the Special court of POCSO Act, on which, the trial court has taken cognizance by order dated 06.01.2025. The order taking cognizance is reiterated underneath:- "आज वििेचक अपराध संख्या - 111/2024, थाना- उसराहार, इटािा की ओर से वििेचना के उपरान्त अवियुक्त विजेन्र कुमार के विरुद्ध धारा- 137(2), 87, 352, 65(1) B.N.S. & 3/4(2) Pocso Act & 3(1)घ, 3(2)5 SC/ST ACT के अपराध में आरोप पत्र प्रस्तुत वकया गया है। अवियुक्त विजेन्र कुमार वजला कारागार से उपवस्थत आया। सुना एिं अवियुक्त के विरुद्ध प्रेवित आरोप पत्र एिं संलग्न केस डायरी का अिलोकन वकया। िादी मुकदमा पीव़िता एिं अन्य गिाहों के धारा 180 बी. एन. एस. में वदये बयानों का अिलोकन वकया। अवियुक्त विजेन्र कुमार के विरुद्ध धारा 137(2), 87, 352, 65(1) B.N.S. & 3/4(2) Pocso Act & 3(1)घ, 3(2)5 SC/ST ACT के अपराध का संज्ञान वलये जाने के वलए पयााप्त आधार है। अपराध का प्रसंज्ञान वलया जाता है। विशेि िाद पंजीकृत हो। पत्रािली िास्ते आरोप वदनांक- 20.01.2025 को प्रस्तुत हो। अवियुक्त विजेन्र कुमार वजला कारागार से आहूत हो।" 7. The above order reveals that on the date of taking cognizance, the accused, who was in jail, was before the court. The endorsement on the margin of the order reveals that the warrant of the accused was changed on that date and it also carries the signatures of the accused. The order does not show the compliance of mandatory requirement of Section 230 B.N.S.S. as there is no compliance directed in the order, it cannot be inferred by the signatures of the accused at the margin that the copies of the documents and police papers would have been provided to the accused-applicant. The compliance of Section 230 B.N.S.S., 2023 is not a mere formality but an epitome of fair trial. 8. It is the argument of learned counsel of the accused-applicant that the trial court by order dated 06.01.2025 has fixed the date for framing of charge, whereas, Sections 261 and 262 B.N.S.S. specifically provide for moving an application for discharge. This argument of learned counsel is not convincing because a right is provided to the accusedapplicant for moving an application for discharge, for which the time period is provided. The Court cannot anticipate whether the accused-applicant may move the application for discharge or not. As such, the fixing of a date for framing of charge is a just and proper order. 9. This Court found that the non-compliance of Section 230 B.N.S.S. has made further proceedings of the case and framing of the charge in contravention to the legal provision and violation of the cardinal principle of free and fair trial, which has an implication that the charge framed by the trial court on 04.04.2025 is liable to be quashed, to give way to the accused for moving of discharge application. 1 All. Irfan Solanki Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. 17 10. Thus, the applicant shall be provided with the copies of police papers and the documents in accordance with Section 230 B.N.S.S. within a week. The accused thereafter, shall be at liberty to move the discharge application in pursuance to the provision of Sections 261 and 262 B.N.S.S. 11. The application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly allowed. ---------- (2026) 1 ILRA 17 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 30.01.2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. Application U/S 528 BNSS. No. 46079 of 2025 Irfan Solanki ...Applicant Versus State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties Issue for consideration Quashing of proceedings at advanced stage of Trial Headnotes Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act, 1986-sec. 3(1)-Application u/s 528 BNSS-to quash the proceeding u/s 3(1) of Act, 1986-Stage of trial -of cross-examination of P.W.-2 after completion of his examination-in-chief and also completion of recording of testimony of P.W.-1- facts of the case and the stage of trial not disputed - prima facie material available against the applicant- Application dismissed. (E-9) Case Law Cited List of Acts 1. Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act, 1986 2. Code of Criminal Procedure 3. Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 List of Keywords Sanction, Rule 16(3) of Rules 2021, prima facie material, stage of trial. Appearances of parties Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohit Singh, Vineet Vikram Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Delivered by Hon'ble Samit Gopal, J.) 1. Heard Sri Imran Ullah, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Mohit Singh and Sri Vineet Vikram, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Manish Goel, learned Senior Advocate/Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Rupak Chaubey, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.