Keran Singh and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2025NA528/27770/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS quashing application; Complaint Case No. 2486 of 2023 (Veeresh Kumar vs. Keran Singh); cognizance/summoning order dated 25.04.2024; Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC; Police Station- Nidauli Kalan, District Etah; prayer refused; withdrawal with liberty; regular bail application; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; category A; charge-sheet on appearance; interim bail; offence punishable up to 7 years; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Sanjay Kumar Pachori; order dated 1.8.2025; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in light of the Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51 category-A observations. ¶¶13

Keran Singh and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2486 of 2023 (Veeresh Kumar vs. Keran Singh) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 25.04.2024 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. should be quashed.

¶¶7

Court's answer

The court refused the applicants' prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2486 of 2023 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 25.04.2024.

¶¶9

Ratio / Principle

On counsel's request after arguments, the applicants were permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶¶10

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed for the applicants, it shall be decided in the light of the observations in the Supreme Court's judgment in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (category A guidance regarding accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance).ratio¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Order dated 1.8.2025: An application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 by Keran Singh and six others seeking quashal of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2486 of 2023 (Veeresh Kumar vs. Keran Singh), Police Station- Nidauli Kalan, District Etah, and of the cognizance/summoning order dated 25.04.2024 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. was considered and the quashing prayer was refused. After further arguments, counsel sought and obtained leave to withdraw the application with liberty to move a regular bail application before the competent court; any such bail application is to be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, concerning category-A accused (charge-sheet submitted on appearance), including decision without taking physical custody or grant of interim bail pending decision of the bail application. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:128798

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 27770 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Keran Singh And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sharad Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2486 of 2023 (Veeresh Kumar vs. Keran Singh) as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 25.04.2024, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Nidauli Kalan, District Etah.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants 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 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 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

¶12

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 :- 1.8.2025 MAA/-

¶15

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

Keran Singh and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keran Singh and 6 Others 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

Shweta Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Habibullah and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ganga Ram and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamlesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Amit Prajapati vs State of U.P. and Another