Ajay Yadav vs State of U.P. - 2026 Supreme(All) 59

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(All) 59

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI
Ajay Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Amit Kumar Tiwari
For the Respondent: G.A.

Table of Content
1. delay in filing fir and its implications (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. allegations and mechanical cognizance (Para 6)
3. justifications for fir delay and exclusion of details (Para 7 , 8)
4. legal standards for issuance of summons (Para 9)
5. proof and admissibility of evidence (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
6. procedural guidance in cognizance proceedings (Para 13 , 14)
7. cognizance requirements based on police reports (Para 15 , 16)
8. conclusion and dismissal of application (Para 17 , 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT :

PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.

1. Heard Amit Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Manish Kumar Yadav, learned State Law Officer for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present application has been filed under Section 528 BNSS with the relief which has been mentioned in the prayer clause of the application. The prayer clause is delineated below:-

"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash/set aside the Impugned Cognizance/Summoning order dated 28.05.2025, passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Jaunpur as well as to quash/set aside the impugned charge sheet bearing C