Dimple Singh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dimple Singh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the cognizance/summoning order dated 20.01.2023 and the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 261 of 2018 should be disposed of by permitting withdrawal, with liberty to file a regular bail application.

Court's answer

In case a bail application is filed by the learned counsel for the applicants, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (including the Category A guidance that where a chargesheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be decided without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided).

Ratio / Principle

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty, i.e., liberty to withdraw the application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Tej Pratap Tiwari, J.), Application U/S 482 No. 32926 of 2024, decided 15 October 2025: Dimple Singh and 7 others filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 20.01.2023 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia, on charge sheet no. 134 of 2019 (dated 22.07.2019) in Case No. 971 of 2023 (State vs. Dimple Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 261 of 2018, under Sections 147, 188, 283, 342, 353, 504 I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Sikandarpur, District Ballia, along with the entire proceedings of the said case. Counsel submitted that the applicants were not arrested during investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against them, and the offence is punishable with up to 7 years' imprisonment. After arguments, counsel sought permission to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application. The Court disposed of the application with that liberty, directing that any bail application filed be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, including its Category A guidance that where a chargesheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be decided without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32926 of 2024

Dimple Singh And 7 Others

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Ram Pravesh Yadav, Shashank Kumar : G.A.

Court No. - 82

HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.

Heard Sri Shashank Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 20.01.2023 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia on charge sheet dated 22.07.2019 bearing charge sheet no. 134 of 2019 registered as Case No. 971 of 2023 (State vs. Dimple Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 261 of 2018, under Sections 147, 188, 283, 342, 353, 504 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Sikandarpur, District Ballia including entire proceedings of the said case.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicants wants to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

In case bail application is filed by the learned counsel for the applicants, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, wherein

A482 No. 32926 of 2024

2

the Supreme Court considering the category(A) as mentioned in the paragraph no. 2, bail applications of such accused against which chargesheet has been submitted on appearance may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided. It has been observed that at the cost of repetition, we wish to state that, in category A, one would expect a better exercise of discretion on the part of the court in favour of the accused.

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)

October 15, 2025

Manoj

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad