Disposed¶16

Kamlesh Shukla and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2025NA528/36520/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS 2023 quashing application; cognizance/summoning order dated 18.04.2023; Criminal Case No. 171 of 2023; Case Crime No. 80 of 2023; Sections 354, 504, 506, 427 IPC; Police Station Sarpataha, District Jaunpur; Judicial Magistrate Ist Jaunpur; charge-sheet without arrest; offences punishable up to 7 years; withdrawal with liberty; regular bail application; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51; category A; interim bail; physical custody; Allahabad High Court; Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; November 3, 2025; disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such application to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v.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

Kamlesh Shukla 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. 171 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 80 of 2023 under Sections 354, 504, 506, 427 IPC (Police Station Sarpataha, District Jaunpur), and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.04.2023 should be quashed.

¶8

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by the applicants to quash the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order 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

If a bail application is filed by the applicants' counsel, it shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 171 of 2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 80 of 2023, under Sections 354, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Sarpataha, District Jaunpur) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist, Jaunpur. Applicants were not arrested during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted; offences alleged punishable up to 7 years. Held: prayer to quash 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 light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A - accused against whom charge-sheet submitted on appearance may be considered without physical custody or with interim bail). Application disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36520 of 2025

¶3

Kamlesh Shukla And Another

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. And Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Devendra Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 75

¶6

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri D.K. Tiwari, 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. 171 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 80 of 2023, under Sections 354, 504, 506, 427 of I.P.C., Police Station- Sarpataha, District- Jaunpur as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 18.04.2023, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist, 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 offences are 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. 36520 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

November 3, 2025 MAA/-

¶18

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶19

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

Kamlesh Shukla and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Shukla 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

Similar cases

Anno Alias Anek Pal Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Piyush Trivedi vs State of U.P. and Another

Santira and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Fareed vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhay Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another