Disposed

Shubrati Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2025A482/41263/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Sections 406 and 420 IPC with a chargesheet filed against them. The prayer was refused; the application was withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application, to be decided per the Satender Kumar Antil guidelines for category A accused.

What did the court decide?

Application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court.

Shubrati Khan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17660

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41263 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shubrati Khan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Javed Alam,Nasim Uddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Sri Javed Alam, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Kamleshwar Singh, 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.20034 of 2020 (State Vs. Shubrati Khan and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 255 of 2019, under Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C., Police StationBilari, District- Moradabad, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 5.12.2020, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No.1, Moradabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the chargesheet 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 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

¶12

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 :- 6.2.2025 Akram

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKRAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shubrati Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubrati Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandhya Chauhan and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sumit Panchal and Another vs State of U.P.

Savej and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Momin and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Indra Narayan Mishra vs State of U.P. and 4 Others