Mohmd Hanif and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mohmd Hanif and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for quashing refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A).

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 14334 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 51 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(3), 125, 110 of B.N.S., Police Station Noorpur, District Bijnor) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.9.2025 should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants' prayer (for quashing of the proceedings and summoning order) was refused.

Ratio / Principle

The application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and stands disposed of accordingly.

Key takeaways

If a bail application is subsequently filed for the applicants, 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., as category A accused against whom charge-sheet was submitted on appearance, whose bail applications may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 (Allahabad High Court, Court No. 75, Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J., decided 19.11.2025) by Mohmd Hanif and 3 others seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 14334 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 51 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(3), 125 and 110 of B.N.S., Police Station Noorpur, District Bijnor, together with the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.9.2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor. Counsel for the applicants submitted that they were not arrested during investigation, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the offence was punishable up to 7 years. The Court refused the quashing prayer but, on the application being sought to be withdrawn, disposed of it with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, directing that any such bail application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — category A accused against whom the charge-sheet was filed on appearance may have bail decided without physical custody or with interim bail till the bail application is decided.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39918 of 2025

Mohmd Hanif And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Santosh Singh : G.A.

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathi, Advocate pointed out that he has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 today in the Registry, which is not on the record.

Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record.

Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri A.K. Rai, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the material on record.

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. 14334 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 51 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(3), 125, 110 of B.N.S., Police StationNoorpur, DistrictBijnor as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 15.9.2025, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor.

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.

NA528 No. 39918 of 2025

2

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 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 19, 2025 T. Sinha

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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