Chaman Ali Khan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Chaman Ali Khan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the process issued in Case No. 884 of 2019 (conditional on the accused-applicants appearing before the concerned Magistrate); 30-day bar on arrest pending appearance and filing of the bail application; trial court to decide bail per the cited Supreme Court principles and to consider interim bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the processes issued against the applicants in Case No. 884 of 2019 (arising out of Case Crime No. 245 of 2010) should be quashed in view of the compromise entered into between the applicant and opposite party no. 2.

Ratio / Principle

The process issued in Case No. 884 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 245 of 2010 (ss. 376, 511, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Dholna, District Kasganj), is quashed, subject to the condition that the accused-applicants shall appear before the concerned Magistrate.

Key takeaways

On counsel's prayer for protection of the applicants' interest till filing of the bail application, the accused-applicants shall not be arrested for a period of 30 days, and prior to expiry of that period they should appear before the trial court and apply for bail.ratio¶8
The bail application is to be disposed of considering the principles of law enumerated in Siddharth (2022) 1 SCC 676, Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Aman Preet Singh (2022) 13 SCC 764, dealing with the requirement of arrest of an accused-applicant who has not been arrested during investigation.ratio¶8
Before disposal of the bail application, the trial court shall also consider the release of the applicants on interim bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Avnish Saxena, J.; Court No. 81), by order dated November 10, 2025 in APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. 43759 of 2025 (also styled NA528), disposed of the plea of Chaman Ali Khan and 3 others v. State of U.P. and another by quashing the process issued in Case No. 884 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 245 of 2010 (ss. 376, 511, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Dholna, District Kasganj). The challenge had been narrowed to the compromise reached between the applicant and opposite party no. 2, an earlier Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 700 of 2011 (Sakir and others) having already been dismissed by a coordinate Bench on 23.03.2017. Quashing is conditional on the accused-applicants appearing before the concerned Magistrate; pending appearance they are protected from arrest for 30 days and must apply for bail before expiry, the bail application to be dealt with per the principles of Siddharth (2022) 1 SCC 676, Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Aman Preet Singh (2022) 13 SCC 764, with the trial court additionally directed to consider interim bail.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 43759 of 2025

Chaman Ali Khan And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Malviya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 81

HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

Sri Amit Kumar Malviya, learned counsel for the accused-applicants appears and submits that previously the entire proceeding of Case No. 2461 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 245 of 2010, under Section376, 511, 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, P.S. Dholna, District Kanshi Ram Nagar has been challenged before this Court in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 700 of 2011 ( Sakir and others Vs. State of U.P. and another ), which was dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgement and order dated 23.03.2017

In the circumstances, the application has restricted to challenge the processes issued against the applicants on the ground that the applicant and opposite party no.2 have entered into compromise.

Learned AGA for the State is present.

There is no point of issuing notice to the opposite party.

The compromise is filed along with the application which is at page no. 50.

The process issued in Case No. 884 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 245 of 2010, under Sections 376, 511, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Dholna, District Kasganj are quashed subject to the condition that the accused-applicants shall appear before the concerned Magistrate.

NA528 No. 43759 of 2025

2

The application is disposed of.

At this juncture, learned counsel prayed that the interest of the applicants may be protected till he files the bail application, hence, the accused-applicants shall not be arrested for a period of 30 days. Prior to expiry of the aforesaid period, they should appear before the trial court and apply for bail. The bail application is to be disposed of considering the principles of law enumerated in the cases of Siddharth Vs. State of U.P. reported in (2022) 1 SCC 676 , Satender Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. reported in (2022) 13 SCC 764 , that deals with the requirement of arrest of the accused-applicant who has not been arrested during investigation.

The trial court before disposal of bail application, shall also consider the release of applicants on interim bail.

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

November 10, 2025 Abhishek Sri.

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad