Laxman and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Laxman and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; prayer to quash the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order refused.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 56563 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 341 of 2024, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 12.08.2025 should be quashed.

Court's answer

The prayer to quash the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order was refused.

Ratio / Principle

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.

Key takeaways

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.ratio¶16
Any bail application filed shall be decided in light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., (2022) 10 SCC 51, i.e., for category (A) accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, without taking the accused in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing refused; application withdrawn with liberty to seek regular bail. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) declined to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 56563 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 341 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 354-B, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jainth, District Mathura, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 12.08.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura. After hearing counsel, the prayer was refused; the application was then permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court, any such application to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A: where charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be considered without physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided). Application disposed of on November 25, 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38667 of 2025

Laxman And 8 Others

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Garun Pal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Heard Sri Garun Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri A.K. Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 56563 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 341 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 354-B, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Jainth, District- Mathura as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 12.08.2025, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offencea 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.

NA528 No. 38667 of 2025

2

Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, 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 25, 2025 MAA/-

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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