Disposed¶16

Sudhir Singh @ Suddu and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Oct 2025NA528/35855/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Section 528 BNSS 2023 quashing application; Criminal Case No. 638 of 2023; Case Crime No. 248 of 2023; Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC; Police Station Badlapur; District Jaunpur; cognizance/summoning order dated 18.11.2023; quashing prayer refused; withdrawal with liberty to file regular bail; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; Category A; charge-sheet submitted without arrest; offence punishable up to 7 years; Sudhir Singh @ Suddu; disposed October 29, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash the criminal proceedings and cognizance/summoning order refused; liberty granted to withdraw the application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51. ¶16

Sudhir Singh @ Suddu and Another 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. 638 of 2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 248 of 2023, Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Badlapur, District Jaunpur) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.11.2023 should be quashed.

¶8

Court's answer

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

¶10

Ratio / Principle

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.

¶11

Key takeaways

Any bail application subsequently filed by the applicants shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, including the Category A guidance (recorded at paragraph 15 as the Supreme Court's observation) that bail applications of accused against whom charge-sheets have been submitted on appearance may be decided without taking the accused in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 seeking quashing of Criminal Case No. 638 of 2023 (Case Crime No. 248 of 2023, Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Badlapur, District Jaunpur) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.11.2023 of the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur: prayer refused. Counsel permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court; any such bail application to be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (Category A: charge-sheeted accused who appeared without arrest may be dealt with without physical custody or via interim bail till decision). Application disposed of (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; October 29, 2025).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35855 of 2025

¶3

Sudhir Singh @ Suddu And Another

¶4

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

¶5

Court No. - 75

¶6

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri J.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Alok Mishra, 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. 638 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 248 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Badlapur, District- Jaunpur as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 18.11.2023, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 3/Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur.

¶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 judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51,

¶13

NA528 No. 35855 of 2025

¶14

¶15

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 29, 2025 MAA/-

¶18

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶19

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

Sudhir Singh @ Suddu and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Singh @ Suddu and Another 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