Bablu Tiwari Urf Rajesh Tiwari and Another vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Bablu Tiwari Urf Rajesh Tiwari and Another vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing prayer refused; application disposed of permitting withdrawal with liberty to the applicants to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil (Category A) observations.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Session Trial No. 241 of 2022 (arising out of Case Crime No. 285 of 2020, Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 325 IPC, Police Station Machhali Sehar, District Jaunpur) and the order dated 01.02.2024 issuing non-bailable warrants against the applicants ought to be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants' prayer for quashing the trial proceedings and the non-bailable warrant order was refused.

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the applicants was permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

Any bail application filed shall be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil: for Category A accused (against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance), the bail application may be decided without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) disposed of an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Session Trial No. 241 of 2022 (arising out of Case Crime No. 285 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Machhali Sehar, District Jaunpur) and the order dated 01.02.2024 issuing non-bailable warrants against the applicants, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ist, Jaunpur. The prayer was refused; however, learned counsel for the applicants was granted liberty to withdraw the application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction. The Court directed that any such bail application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, where the Supreme Court observed that for Category A accused, against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be decided without taking the accused in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41941 of 2025

Bablu Tiwari Urf Rajesh Tiwari And Another

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Subham Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Subham Singh, learned counsel for the applicants 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 Session Trial No. 241 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 285 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 325 of I.P.C., Police Station- Machhali Sehar, District- Jaunpur as well as order dated 01.02.2024 whereby nonbailable warrants has been issued against the applicants pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ist, Jaunpur.

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

NA528 No. 41941 of 2025

2

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.

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

October 29, 2025 Ishan

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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