Disposed¶20

Satyam Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2025NA528/40095/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application dismissed by disposal with liberty; S. 528 BNSS; Section 380 IPC; cognizance/summoning order dated 03.12.2024; Criminal Case No. 12270 of 2024; Case Crime No. 250 of 2024; PS Mubarakpur; District Azamgarh; Chief Judicial Magistrate Azamgarh; charge-sheet without arrest; offence punishable up to 7 years; withdrawal with liberty to file regular bail; Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51 Category A; bail without physical custody or interim bail till decision; Allahabad High Court 2025; Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing refused; liberty granted to withdraw the application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such bail application to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51. ¶20

Satyam Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 12270 of 2024 (arising out of Case Crime No. 250 of 2024, under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh ought to be quashed. +1 more

¶12

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant (for quashing the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order) is refused.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant was permitted to withdraw the application, and the application stands disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶15

Key takeaways

In case a regular bail application is filed by learned counsel for the applicant, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, i.e., for Category (A) accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, the bail application may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) | APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. 40095 of 2025 | Satyam Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another | Decided 26.11.2025. Applicant sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 12270 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 250 of 2024, under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh, together with the cognizance/summoning order dated 03.12.2024 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh. Counsel submitted that the applicant was never arrested during investigation, a charge-sheet stood submitted against him, and the offence was punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. HELD: after some arguments, the quashing prayer was refused; counsel was permitted to withdraw the application, and it was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court. Any such bail application is to be decided in light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — Category (A) cases where charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance may be decided without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40095 of 2025

Satyam Yadav

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sitaram Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 75

¶10

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶11

Sri Chandra Bhushan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sitaram Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶12

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. 12270 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 250 of 2024, under Section 380 of I.P.C., Police Station- Mubarakpur, DistrictAzamgarh as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 03.12.2024, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against him. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

¶14

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is, hereby, refused.

¶15

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant wants to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶16

In case bail application is filed by the learned counsel for the applicant, 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

¶17

NA528 No. 40095 of 2025

¶18

¶19

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.

¶20

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶21

November 26, 2025 Ishan

¶22

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyam Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyam Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjit and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Nancy Khan Alias Tanu Singh Alias Harshita vs State of U.P. and Another

Laxman and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Anant Rai and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Shiromani Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another

Atar Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another