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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None of the relief sought (quashing of the cognizance order dated 28.04.2025, the Charge Sheet dated 10.12.2024 and the entire proceeding of S.S.T No. 156 of 2025) was granted; it was expressly refused. Instead, interim directions were issued: surrender within three weeks, expeditious decision of any bail application in accordance with Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021 SCC OnLine SC 922), and no coercive action during that period or until surrender, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned cognizance order dated 28.04.2025, the Charge Sheet dated 10.12.2024 and the entire proceeding of S.S.T No. 156 of 2025 (State vs Santosh, Case Crime No. 331 of 2024, Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) BNS and 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act) pending before the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jaunpur should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the applicant chose not to press the relief sought (quashing of the cognizance order, charge sheet and proceedings) on merit, the relief as sought through this application is refused.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is directed to surrender before the concerned court below within three weeks; if he applies for bail thereafter, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

Key takeaways

For the period of three weeks from the date of the order, or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 41376 of 2025 (Santosh Upadhyay vs State of U.P. and Another), decided 28 October 2025: An application under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of the cognizance order dated 28.04.2025 and the Charge Sheet dated 10.12.2024, and of the entire proceeding of S.S.T No. 156 of 2025 (State vs Santosh), Case Crime No. 331 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (B.N.S) and 3(2)(va) of the S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Machhali Shahar, District Jaunpur, pending before the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jaunpur. When the matter was taken up, counsel for the applicant did not press the relief on merit and prayed only for expeditious disposal of his bail application, to which the learned A.G.A. raised no objection. Accordingly, the relief sought was refused. The Court directed the applicant to surrender before the concerned court below within three weeks, ordered that any bail application be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2021 SCC OnLine SC 922), and held that no coercive action would be taken against him for three weeks or until surrender, whichever was earlier. The application was disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41376 of 2025

Santosh Upadhyay

.....Applicant(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pawan Kumar Shukla, Rajesh Kumar Gautam Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 74

HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant to quash the impugned cognizance order dated 28.04.2025 and Charge Sheet dated 10.12.2024, as well as entire proceeding of S.S.T No. 156 of 2025, (State Vs Santosh) Case Crime No. 331 of 2024, Under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (B.N.S), and 3(2)(va) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Machhali Shahar, District-Jaunpur, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jaunpur.

On the matter being taken up, learned counsel for the applicant has not pressed the relief as sought by means of this application on merit and prayed for issuance of appropriate direction to the concerned Courts below to decide the bail application of the applicant expeditiously.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in allowing the aforesaid prayer of the applicant.

Accordingly the relief as sought by the applicant through this application is refused.

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that applicant shall surrender before the concerned Court below within three weeks from today and in case applies for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law laid down

NA528 No. 41376 of 2025

2

by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 528 BNSS stands disposed of.

(Deepak Verma,J.)

October 28, 2025

Nitin Verma

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad