The applicants sought to quash criminal proceedings under the BNSS. The prayer for quashing was refused. The application was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application, guided by Supreme Court observations in Satender Kumar Antil regarding bail for Category A offenses where chargesheets are submitted.
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. - 39901 of 2025
Sameer And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
| Versus | ||
|---|---|---|
| State of U.P. and Another | .....Opposite Party(s) |
|
| Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s) |
: Jitendra Singh, Maiku Pramod Kumar Shukla : G.A. |
Lal Maurya, |
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Sri Vikas Rastogi and Sri Pramod Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.N. Upadhyay, brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.
The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3879 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 772 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., Police Station- Modi Nagar, District- Ghaziabad as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 11.08.2025, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ghaziabad.
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.
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
NA528 No. 39901 of 2025
2
rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. 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.
December 16, 2025 Ishan
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)
Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to quash the criminal proceedings pending against them?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & AnotherRelied on¶16
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sameer And 2 Others
State of U.P. and Another
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
