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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order refused; applicant's counsel allowed to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, to be considered in the light of the category-A observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 72 of 2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 393 of 2021, Sections 279 and 427 IPC, P.S. Sumerpur, District Hamirpur) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 04.01.2023 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur should be quashed.

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court refused the applicant's prayer to quash the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order.

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

Direction of this Court: if a regular bail application is filed, it shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, concerning category A (charge-sheet submitted on appearance). The specific content of those observations is reproduced from the quoted Supreme Court judgment and is recorded here only as the basis of this Court's direction, not as this Court's own holding.obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) [Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 40840 of 2025, decided November 21, 2025] Jayant Singh v. State of U.P. and Another: Application under S. 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 72 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 393 of 2021 under Sections 279 and 427 IPC, Police Station Sumerpur, District Hamirpur, and of the cognizance/summoning order dated 04.01.2023 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur. Counsel submitted the applicant was not arrested during investigation, the charge-sheet stood submitted against him, and the offence is punishable up to 7 years. The Court refused the quashing prayer; on further arguments counsel was permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction. Any such bail application is to be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A - accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance). Application disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40840 of 2025

Jayant Singh

.....Applicant(s)

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

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Mir Sayed, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Madhvendra Pratap 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. 72 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 393 of 2021, under Sections 279, 427 of I.P.C., Police Station- Sumerpur, DistrictHamirpur as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 04.01.2023, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur.

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.

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

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.

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 Supreme Court considering the category(A) as mentioned in the paragraph

NA528 No. 40840 of 2025

2

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 21, 2025 Ishan

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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