Disposed¶16

Sani @ Chhote Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2025NA528/35466/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Section 528 BNSS 2023; quashing of criminal proceedings; cognizance/summoning order 30.06.2025; Criminal Case No. 705 of 2025; Case Crime No. 386 of 2024; Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS; P.S. Chharra, District Aligarh; ACJM Atrauli; charge-sheet filed without arrest; offence punishable up to 7 years; withdrawal with liberty; regular bail application; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; category A; interim bail; no physical custody; Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; disposed of October 14, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash refused; application disposed of permitting withdrawal with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51. ¶16

Sani @ Chhote Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 705 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2024, Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S. Chharra, District Aligarh) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 30.06.2025 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Atrauli ought to be quashed.

¶8

Court's answer

The prayer made by the applicants to quash the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order was refused.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶11

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed, it shall be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, wherein (category A) bail applications of accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance may be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking quashment of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 705 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2024, Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S. Chharra, District Aligarh) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 30.06.2025 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Atrauli: HELD, the prayer is refused. After arguments, counsel sought and obtained leave to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court; any such bail application is to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, whereunder (category A) bail of an accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance may be considered without taking him in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided. Application disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35466 of 2025

¶3

Sani @ Chhote Lal

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Rakesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 75

¶6

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 705 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Chharra, District- Aligarh as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 30.06.2025, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Atrauli, District Aligarh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

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

¶13

NA528 No. 35466 of 2025

¶14

¶15

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 better exercise of discretion on the part of the court in favour of the accused.

¶16

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶17

October 14, 2025 MAA/-

¶18

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶19

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

Sani @ Chhote Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sani @ Chhote Lal 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