Application under Section 528 BNSS to quash criminal proceedings was refused. The application was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application, which is to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.
Application refused; liberty granted to file regular bail application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37183 of 2025
Shamim And 3 Others
| Versus | .....Applicant(s) | |
|---|---|---|
| State of U.P. and Another | .....Opposite Party(s) |
|
| Counsel for Applicant(s) | : Sanjay Srivastava |
|
| Counsel for Opposite Party(s) | : G.A. |
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and 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. 2718 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 169 of 2023, under Sections 147, 149, 323, 308, 352 of I.P.C., Police Station- Daurala, District- Meerut as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 08.02.2024, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Meerut.
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. 37183 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 13, 2025
MAA/-
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)
Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings and cognizance order should be quashed?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar AntilReferred¶12
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shamim And 3 Others
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
