Disposed¶16

Chandra Prakash Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2025NA528/41962/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS quashing application dismissed by withdrawal; BNS Sections 333, 110, 115(2), 352, 351(3); Case Crime No. 166 of 2025; Criminal Case No. 2729 of 2025; P.S. Rath, District Hamirpur; cognizance/summoning order dated 15.09.2025; charge-sheet without arrest; offences punishable up to 7 years; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51 Category A; bail without physical custody or interim bail; liberty to file regular bail; applicant in person; A.G.A. Karunakar Singh; Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; decided November 19, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51. ¶16

Chandra Prakash Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2729 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 166 of 2025, B.N.S. sections, P.S. Rath, Hamirpur) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.09.2025 should be quashed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023.

¶8

Court's answer

The Court refused the applicant's prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

On the applicant's request after arguments, the Court permitted withdrawal of the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and disposed of the application with that liberty.

¶11

Key takeaways

The Court directed that any bail application filed by the applicant shall be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (Category A: where a charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance, bail may be considered without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided).ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), November 19, 2025 — Application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2729 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 166 of 2025 under Sections 333, 110, 115(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., P.S. Rath, District Hamirpur, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.09.2025 of the Magistrate at Rath. Counsel submitted the applicant was never arrested and a charge-sheet stands filed, the offences being punishable up to seven years. The Court refused the quashing prayer but, on the applicant's request, permitted withdrawal with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court, directing that such bail application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (Category A: charge-sheeted accused who appeared without arrest may have bail considered without physical custody or with interim bail till decision). Application disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41962 of 2025

¶3

Chandra Prakash Gupta

¶4

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

¶5

Court No. - 75

¶6

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Gupta, who appears in person 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 the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2729 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 166 of 2025, under Sections 333, 110, 115(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., P.S. Rath, District Hamirpur as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 15.09.2025, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rath, Hamirpur.

¶9

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 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 applicant is, hereby, refused.

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

NA528 No. 41962 of 2025

¶14

¶15

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

November 19, 2025

¶18

MAA/-

¶19

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶20

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

Chandra Prakash Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Prakash Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Anita and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chhote Khan vs State of Up

Dashmesh vs State of U.P. and Another

Kariya Alias Madhav Prasad and 6 Others vs State of U.P.

Monu and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Surya Prakash and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another