Pawan Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Pawan Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing prayer refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 99446 of 2023 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2024 (offences under Sections 354, 323, 504, 427, 379 IPC, Police Station Sigra, District Varanasi) ought to be quashed.

Court's answer

The prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 99446 of 2023 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2024 was refused on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case.

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant was permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and the application stands disposed of with that liberty.

Key takeaways

If a regular bail application is filed pursuant to the liberty granted, it shall be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category 'A': accused against whom charge-sheet has been filed on appearance may be considered for bail without physical custody or by grant of interim bail).ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), September 9, 2025 - Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (No. 34220 of 2025) by Pawan Srivastava seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 99446 of 2023 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 29.07.2024, whereby the learned Magistrate took cognizance under Sections 354, 323, 504, 427, 379 IPC (Police Station Sigra, District Varanasi), pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Varanasi. Held: (i) the prayer to quash was refused; (ii) on the applicant's counsel seeking withdrawal, the application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court; (iii) any such bail application is to be decided in the light of the Supreme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 & Anr., (2022) 10 SCC 51, wherein it was observed that for category 'A' accused (charge-sheet filed on appearance), bail applications may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail, with a better exercise of discretion expected in favour of the accused. Application disposed of accordingly.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34220 of 2025

Pawan Srivastava

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Rajesh Narain Srivastva
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 74

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Rajesh Narain Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Chavipal Singh, brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 99446 of 2023, as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 29.07.2024 by which the learned Magistrate took cognizance under Sections 354, 323, 504, 427, 379 of I.P.C., Police Station- Sigra, District Varanasi, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Varanasi.

Learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant is, hereby, refused.

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.

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. 34220 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 9, 2025 Ishan

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad