Rohit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rohit Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to move a bail application before the court concerned within three weeks, with a direction that the bail prayer be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law; and interim protection that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant for three weeks or till he applies for bail, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 332/2025 (State Vs. Rohit Singh) pending before Additional Session Judge, Court No.7, Unnao, and the impugned summoning order dated 12.03.2021 (Misc. Case No. 5676/2021, CJM Unnao) should be quashed. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if the applicant applies for bail before the court concerned within three weeks from the date of this order, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

For a period of three weeks from the date of this order, or till the applicant applies for bail (whichever is earlier), no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Court No. 16 (Brij Raj Singh, J.) — APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 8679 of 2025, Rohit Singh v. State of U.P., decided 10.10.2025. The applicant, who had been summoned under Section 18/27 Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 by summoning order dated 12.03.2021 passed by the CJM, Unnao in Misc. Case No. 5676/2021 (P.S. Hasanganj, District Unnao), sought quashing of S.T. No. 332/2025 (State Vs. Rohit Singh) pending before the Additional Session Judge, Court No.7, Unnao, together with the summoning order. After arguing at some length, counsel did not press the application on merit and confined the prayer to being permitted to move a bail application in light of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (SLP(C) No. 5191 of 2021), with directions for expeditious hearing. The Court disposed of the application, directing that if the applicant applies for bail before the court concerned within three weeks his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, and that for three weeks or till such bail application (whichever is earlier) no coercive action shall be taken against him. The quashing prayer was not adjudicated on merits.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8679 of 2025

Rohit Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Chandra Dwivedi, Mayank Tiwari, Uday Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the punishment provided against the impugned order is less than 7 years. He has requested that he may be given the benefit of Satendra Kumar Antil.

The present application has been filed with a prayer to pass an order allowing the petition quashing the entire proceedings of the S.T. No. 332/2025, State Vs. Rohit Singh, pending in the court of Additional Session Judge, Court No.7, Unnao and impugned summoning order dated 12.03.2021 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao, in Misc. Case No. 5676/2021 by means of which the applicant has been summoned under Section 18/27 Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, Police Station Hasanganj, District Unnao.

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicant may be permitted to move bail application in light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5191 of 2021, before the court concerned and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

A482 No. 8679 of 2025

2

In view of the above, the application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if the applicant applies for bail before the court concerned within three weeks from today, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously, in accordance with law.

For a period of three weeks from today or till the applicant applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

October 10, 2025 Muk

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench