Applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings and summoning/NBW orders in a BNS case. Prayer was refused; counsel then withdrew the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court.
Liberty granted to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41750 of 2025
Rajesh Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
| .....Opposite Party(s) |
|
|---|---|
| Counsel for Applicant(s) | : Ken Singh |
| Counsel for Opposite Party(s) | : G.A. |
Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Sri Ken Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Alok Mishra, 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. 12462 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 161 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 110 of B.N.S., Police Station- Lohamandi, District- Agra as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 26.6.2025 and order dated 16.9.2025, whereby Non Bailable Warrant has been issued against the applicant, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have 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. 41750 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.
December 10, 2025 T. Sinha
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)
Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings under Sections 115(2), 352, 110 BNS against the applicant should be quashed.
Whether the applicant may be permitted to withdraw the application to seek regular bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & AnotherRelied on
(2022) 10 SCC 51 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajesh Kumar
State of U.P.
Another
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
