Disposed

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2025NA528/41539/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the applicant's prayer to quash criminal proceedings and the summoning order. The court allowed the withdrawal of the quashing application with liberty to file a regular bail application, directing the magistrate to consider it in light of the Supreme Court's ruling in Satender Kumar Antil regarding Category A offences.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of application allowed with liberty to file regular bail application.

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41539 of 2025

¶3

Shiv Kumar And 3 Others

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Abhishek Ankur Saifullah Khan	Chaurasia, Diwan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 75

¶6

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Diwan Saifullah Khan, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3489 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 35 of 2025, under Sections 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S. (308, 323, 504, 506 of IPC), Police Station- Bargarh, District- Chitrakoot as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 30.06.2025, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Chitrakoot.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offences are punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

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

¶13

NA528 No. 41539 of 2025

¶14

¶15

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.

¶16

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶17

December 10, 2025

¶18

MAA/-

¶19

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satish Kumar Vats vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Patel and 2 Others vs State of Up

Shyama Charan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Mudassir vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhananjay Singh and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another