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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with liberty to surrender before the court concerned within three weeks and apply for bail; bail application to be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825); no coercive action against the applicant till three weeks from the date of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated 4.10.2024 and the cognizance and summoning order dated 4.7.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in Case no. 14557 of 2025 (State vs. Vinod and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 402 of 2024 under sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS (PS-Tappal, District Aligarh), along with the entire proceedings of said case, ought to be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

On perusal of the narration of the FIR, the impugned order and the chargesheet, the Court found no ground warranting its interference or permitting the impugned order along with the chargesheet to be set aside.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, the prayer sought through the instant application (quashing of the chargesheet, cognizance/summoning order and entire proceedings) was refused.

Key takeaways

The instant application was finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if the applicant surrenders before the court concerned within three weeks and applies for bail, the matter will proceed accordingly.ratio¶11
If the applicant surrenders within three weeks and applies for bail, the bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825).ratio¶14
It was made clear that till three weeks from the date of the order, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of the aforesaid case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J., Court No. 77), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25669 of 2025, decided 13.11.2025: Applicant Sanjay sought quashing of chargesheet dated 4.10.2024 and cognizance and summoning order dated 4.7.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in Case no. 14557 of 2025 (State vs. Vinod and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 402 of 2024 registered under sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, PS-Tappal, District Aligarh, along with the entire proceedings of the said case. On perusal of the FIR narration, impugned order and chargesheet, the Court found no ground warranting interference and refused the quashing prayer. The application was disposed of with a direction that if the applicant surrenders within three weeks and applies for bail, the bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825); till three weeks from the date of the order, no coercive action was to be taken against the applicant.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25669 of 2025

Sanjay	.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Utkarsh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 77

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA appearing for the State.

This present application has been filed for seeking quashing of chargesheet dated 4.10.2024 as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 4.7.2025 passed by learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in Case no. 14557 of 2025 (State vs. Vinod and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 402 of 2024 registered under sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, PS- Tappal, District Aligarh along with entire proceeding of said case.

On perusal of the narration of FIR as well as impugned order and chargesheet, this Court does not find it to be a case where interference of this Court is required. No such ground appears to be available in the present application, on the basis of which, impugned order along with chargesheet, can be set aside.

Accordingly, the prayer sought through the instant application, is refused.

Lastly, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that liberty may be granted to applicants to surrender before the court concerned and apply for bail to which learned AGA has no objection.

In view of the aforesaid, the instant application is finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that in case, the applicant surrender before the court concerned within a period of three weeks from today and apply for

NA528 No. 25669 of 2025

2

bail, his bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825).

However, it is made clear that till three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant herein in pursuance of aforesaid case.

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

November 13, 2025 Shaswat

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad