Mohanlal and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mohanlal and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender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

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1036 of 2022 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2024 (Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Chandpa, District Hathras) should be quashed under Section 528 BNSS. +1 more

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants' prayer to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1036 of 2022 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2024 is refused.

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed, it shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the Supreme Court judgment in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51: for category A accused against whom a charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, the bail application may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 22102 of 2025 (Mohanlal And 4 Others v State of U.P. and Another), decided September 4, 2025: Application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1036 of 2022 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2024 (Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station Chandpa, District Hathras), pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/F.T.C., Hathras. The prayer to quash was refused upon consideration of facts and circumstances. Learned counsel then withdrew the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; such bail application, if filed, shall be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — for category A accused against whom a charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be decided without taking the accused in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22102 of 2025

Mohanlal And 4 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashutosh Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 74

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri C.P. Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ashutosh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri B.N. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1036 of 2022 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Chandpa, District- Hathras, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/F.T.C., Hathras.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

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

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 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

NA528 No. 22102 of 2025

2

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.

September 4, 2025 T. Sinha

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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