Wasim Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Wasim Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash refused; application withdrawn and disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, any such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 166 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 655 of 2024 (Sections 191(2), 115(2), 125, 351(3), 352, 191(3), 110 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh), and the summoning order dated 15.05.2025 should be quashed.

Court's answer

The prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants to quash the proceedings and the summoning order is refused.

Ratio / Principle

The application is permitted to be withdrawn and stands disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

In case a bail application is filed by counsel for the applicants, it shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 166 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 655 of 2024, Sections 191(2), 115(2), 125, 351(3), 352, 191(3), 110 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh) and the summoning order dated 15.05.2025 pending before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Aligarh — prayer refused by the High Court. Counsel withdrew the application; it was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, any such bail application to be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, regarding category(A) accused against whom a charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40020 of 2025

Wasim

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Piyush Patel
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Piyush Patel, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Chhabi Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. 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. 166 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 655 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 125, 351(3), 352, 191(3), 110 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station- Iglas, District- Aligarh as well as summoning order dated 15.05.2025, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Aligarh.

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 rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central

NA528 No. 40020 of 2025

2

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.

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

October 15, 2025

Vibha Singh

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad