Disposed¶13

Vikash Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 May 2025NA528/17330/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 17330 of 2025, decided 23.5.2025: quashing prayer under Section 528 BNSS refused; disposed of with liberty to file regular bail; Section 84 BNSS proceedings; Sections 316(2), 318(4) BNS; Case Crime No. 759 of 2024, PS Robertsganj, Sonbhadra; Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51 category A bail guidelines relied upon.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of: prayer for quashing refused, but applicant permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A). ¶13

Vikash Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the application under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the order dated 22.4.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra (whereby proceedings under Section 84 BNSS were initiated in Case Crime No. 759 of 2024) should be allowed.

¶7

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant (for quashing the order dated 22.4.2025) is refused.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the applicant to withdraw the application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶10

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed, it shall be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51: for category A accused (charge-sheet submitted after appearance without arrest), bail applications may be decided without taking the accused in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided, with a better exercise of discretion expected in favour of the accused.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS against order dated 22.4.2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra initiating proceedings under Section 84 BNSS in Case Crime No. 759 of 2024 (State v. Vikas Kumar) under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) BNS, Police Station- Robertsganj, District- Sonbhadra — prayer refused; applicant, who was not arrested during investigation and against whom the charge-sheet was submitted, allowed to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court; such bail application to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, wherein for category A accused bail may be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88321

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17330 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vikash Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shubham Srivastava,Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Sri S.K.Srivastava learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the order dated 22.4.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra, passed in a criminal case arising out of Case Crime No. 759 of 2024 (State v. Vikas Kumar), under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) BNS, Police Station- Robertsganj, District- Sonbhadra, whereby proceedings under Section 84 of BNSS has been initiated.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted against him. 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 applicant is, hereby, refused.

¶10

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant, 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 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

¶12

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.

¶13

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶14

Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Akram

¶15

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

Vikash Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash Kumar 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

Asif vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Kavindra Kaur vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintu vs State of U.P. and Another

Nand Kishor Shukla and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Durga Alias Lata and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Hariprakash Rai and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another