Nandram Alias Nanda and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Nandram Alias Nanda and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash refused; application disposed of with liberty to the applicants' counsel to withdraw and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A).

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 58 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 776 of 2020 (Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kadaura, District Jalaun) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.09.2020 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Kalpi, Jalaun should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty, i.e., liberty to withdraw and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

Direction recorded: if a regular bail application is filed by the applicants' counsel, it shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the Supreme Court's judgment in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A).obiter¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; order dated December 10, 2025) disposed of an application under Section 528 BNSS by Nandram alias Nanda and another seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 58 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 776 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC (P.S. Kadaura, District Jalaun) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.09.2020 of the Judicial Magistrate, Kalpi, Jalaun. The court refused the quashing prayer. On the counsel's request, the application was disposed of 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 Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, category A (accused not arrested, charge-sheet filed on appearance), wherein bail applications of such accused may be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail till decision.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41847 of 2025

Nandram Alias Nanda And Another

.....Applicant(s)

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

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Dhirendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Chavipal 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. 58 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 776 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Kadaura, DistrictJalaun as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 08.09.2020, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Kalpi, Jalaun.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted against them. 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 applicants is, hereby, refused.

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.

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 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. 41847 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 Ishan

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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