Disposed

Satyendra Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2025NA528/38974/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of 1999 trial proceedings under the U.P. Public Examination Act, a charge sheet, NBW and process under Section 82 CrPC, claiming he had no knowledge of the charge sheet until warrants issued. Without expressing any opinion on merits, the court directed him to appear before the trial court and apply for bail expeditiously.

What the court decided

AI extract

Satyendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38974 of 2025

¶3

Satyendra Kumar Yadav

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 78

¶10

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶12

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 438 of 1999 under Section U.P. Public Examination Act, P.S.- Chakiya, District- Chandauli as well as charge sheet dated 21.5.1999 and NBW and proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. dated 9.9.2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 32 of 1999 pending before the Court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Judicial Magistrate Chakiya, District- Chandauli. Further prayer has been made to stay the effect and operation of the aforesaid order.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had no knowledge about the submission of the charge sheet in this matter and for the first time it was brought to his notice when non-bailable warrant and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against him. It is further submitted that the applicant has every intention to appear before the court concerned and participate in the trial.

¶14

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer.

¶15

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order as well as the other materials brought on record. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is disposed of with the direction that the applicant shall appear before the Court concerned and apply for bail as early as possible, the same shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶16

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of .

¶17

October 28, 2025 Fhd

¶18

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyendra Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Satyendra Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases