Abhay Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Abhay Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3026 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 211 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station Mariyahun, District Jaunpur, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.07.2025 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaunpur, should be quashed.

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 and the cognizance/summoning order) is refused.

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicants withdrew the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

In case a 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 v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.ratio¶12
The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 36545 of 2025, decided November 3, 2025: Abhay Singh and 3 others applied under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3026 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 211 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station Mariyahun, District Jaunpur, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.07.2025 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaunpur; counsel submitted that the applicants were not arrested during investigation, the charge-sheet stood submitted against them, and the offences are punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. The court first refused the prayer; after further arguments counsel withdrew the application, and it was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, any such application to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (per the cited judgment, in category A - accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance - bail may be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail till decision, with a better exercise of discretion expected in favour of the accused).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36545 of 2025

Abhay Singh And 3 Others

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

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Heard Sri V.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Alok Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

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. 3026 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 211 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Mariyahun, District- Jaunpur as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 22.07.2025, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 12, Jaunpur.

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.

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

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.

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,

NA528 No. 36545 of 2025

2

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.

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

November 3, 2025 MAA/-

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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