Disposed¶17

Ram Dular and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2025NA528/37089/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to seek regular bail; cognizance/summoning order dated 14.5.2025 in Criminal Case No. 373 of 2025 (Case Crime No. 23 of 2024, Sections 323, 504, 308, 506 IPC, P.S. Didarganj, Azamgarh) not interfered with; charge-sheet filed without arrest; offence punishable up to 7 years; bail application to be decided per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51, category A — release without physical custody or interim bail; Allahabad High Court, Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J., November 6, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10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; the quashing prayer was refused. ¶17

Ram Dular and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 373 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2024, Sections 323, 504, 308, 506 IPC, P.S. Didarganj, District Azamgarh) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 14.5.2025 should be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

¶9

Court's answer

The prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants (for quashing of the proceedings and cognizance/summoning order) is refused.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

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

¶12

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed by the applicants' counsel, it shall be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — i.e., for category A accused against whom a charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, bail applications may be decided without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), November 6, 2025 — Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 37089 of 2025 (Ram Dular and Another v. State of U.P. and Another): Applicants sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 373 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 308, 506 IPC, Police Station Didarganj, District Azamgarh, and of the cognizance/summoning order dated 14.5.2025 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 22, Azamgarh. Counsel submitted the applicants were never arrested, a charge-sheet stood filed, and the offence was punishable up to 7 years. The Court refused the quashing prayer but, on counsel's request, permitted withdrawal of the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court, directing that any such bail application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — where, for category A accused against whom a charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be considered without physical custody or by grant of interim bail till decision.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37089 of 2025

¶3

Ram Dular And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sanjeev Kumar Rai, Viveka Nand Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 75

¶7

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶8

Sri Viveka Nand Rai, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 373 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 308, 506 of I.P.C., Police StationDidarganj, District- Azamgarh as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 14.5.2025, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 22, Azamgarh.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

NA528 No. 37089 of 2025

¶15

¶16

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.

¶17

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶18

November 6, 2025 T. Sinha

¶19

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Dular and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Dular 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

Yogesh @ Kartoos vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sunita Devi vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Amit Kumar Lal vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another