Disposed¶13

Rahul and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2025A482/39869/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing application; cognizance/summoning order 2.8.2023; Criminal Case No. 553 of 2023; Case Crime No. 402 of 2022; Sections 147/323/504/506/452/325 IPC; Police Station Kerakat, District Jaunpur; charge-sheet submitted without arrest; offence punishable up to 7 years; bail without physical custody / interim bail; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51 category A; prayer to quash refused; application disposed of with liberty to file regular bail application.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to withdraw the quashing application and file a regular bail application before a court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application, if filed, is to be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51. ¶13

Rahul and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 553 of 2023 (State v. Subhash Bharti and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 402 of 2022, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 2.8.2023, should be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶7

Court's answer

This court refused the applicants' prayer to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 553 of 2023 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 2.8.2023.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

With the prayer refused, counsel withdrew the application; the application stands disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶13

Key takeaways

Any regular bail application subsequently filed shall be decided by the competent court in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A).obiter¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Order dated 11.2.2025, Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:19655 - Application U/S 482 No. 39869 of 2024, Rahul and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another: the applicants sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 553 of 2023 (State v. Subhash Bharti and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 402 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Kerakat, District Jaunpur, and of the cognizance/summoning order dated 2.8.2023 pending before Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)-1st/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur. Counsel submitted that the applicants were not arrested during investigation though a charge-sheet was filed against them, and that the offence is punishable with up to 7 years' imprisonment. The court refused the quashing prayer; counsel then withdrew the application, and the court disposed of it with liberty to file a regular bail application, directing that any such application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A).

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19655

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39869 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Sri Anurag Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 553 of 2023, (State Vs. Subhash Bharti and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 402 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 of I.P.C., Police Station- Kerakat, District- Jaunpur, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 2.8.2023, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)-1st/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur.

¶8

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

¶9

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants is, hereby, refused.

¶10

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.

¶11

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 judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 , wherein the Supreme Court considering the category(A) as mentioned in the paragraph no. 2, bail applications of such accused against which

¶12

charge-sheet 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 except a better exercise of discretion on the part of the court in favour of the accused.

¶13

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶14

Order Date :- 11.2.2025 T. Sinha

¶15

Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases