Disposed¶18

Sunil Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2025NA528/47538/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS application disposal; quashing of non-bailable warrants refused; three-week stay of NBW execution; direction to appear before court below and seek recall of warrant; automatic vacation of interim protection on default; POCSO Act sessions trial; Sant Kabir Nagar; Sections 376D/452 IPC and 5/6, 7/8 POCSO; interim protection; warrant recall.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection: execution of the non-bailable warrants against the applicants stayed for three weeks; applicants directed to appear before the court below within three weeks and seek recall of the warrants; protection to stand automatically vacated on default. ¶18

Sunil Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the non-bailable warrant orders dated 17.02.2025 (applicant no.1) and 03.05.2025 (applicant no.2) passed by the Additional District Judge, POCSO Act, Sant Kabir Nagar should be quashed. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

The Section 528 BNSS application was finally disposed of with the aforesaid directions (the warrants were not quashed; their execution alone was stayed for three weeks).

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The applicants were directed to appear before the court concerned within three weeks and to move an application for recall of the non-bailable warrant, which shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶15

Key takeaways

For a period of three weeks, the execution of the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicants was stayed.ratio¶16
In case of default by the applicants, the interim protection granted by the Court shall stand automatically vacated and the court below shall be free to proceed against the applicants in accordance with law.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.) disposed of Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 47538 of 2025 (Sunil Yadav and another v. State of U.P. and 3 others), which sought quashing of non-bailable warrant orders dated 17.02.2025 and 03.05.2025 passed by the Additional District Judge, POCSO Act, Sant Kabir Nagar in Sessions Case No. 711 of 2023 (State Vs. Sunil Yadav and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 918 of 2023 (Sections 376D, 504, 506, 452, 354D IPC and Sections 5/6, 7/8 POCSO Act against applicant no.1; Sections 376D, 452 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act against applicant no.2). Instead of quashing the warrants, the Court directed the applicants to appear before the court below within three weeks and apply for recall of the warrants, stayed execution of the warrants for three weeks, and provided that the interim protection would automatically stand vacated on default, leaving the court below free to proceed thereafter.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 47538 of 2025

¶3

Sunil Yadav And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Manish Mani, Vikas Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 74

¶7

HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no.1 and perused the record.

¶9

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants to quash the impugned N.B.W. orders dated 17.02.2025 issued against the applicant no.1 and N.B.W. order dated 03.05.2025 issued against the applicant no.2 passed by the court of learned Additional District Judge, POCSO Act, Sant Kabir Nagar in Sessions Case No.711 of 2023 (State Vs. Sunil Yadav and another), arising out of Case Crime No.918 of 2023, under Sections 376D, 504, 506, 452, 354D I.P.C. and Section 5/6 and 7/8 POCSO Act against the applicant no.1 and under Section 376D, 452 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act against the applicant no.2, Police Station-Khalilabad, District-Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶10

From the record, it transpires that on account of the failure of the applicants to appear before the court below, non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant Nos.1 and 2 by the court below vide order dated 17.02.2025 and 03.05.2025, respectively.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that interest of justice shall be served provided some protection is granted by this Court to enable the applicants to appear before the court below.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that

¶13

NA528 No. 47538 of 2025

¶14

¶15

the applicants shall appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today and moves an application for recall of non bailable warrant, which shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶16

For a period of three weeks, the execution of non bailable warrant issued against the applicants shall remain stayed.

¶17

In case of default, the interim protection granted by this Court shall stand automatically vacated and the court below shall be free to proceed against the applicants in accordance with law.

¶18

With the aforesaid direction, the 528 BNSS application is finally disposed off.

¶19

(Deepak Verma,J.)

¶20

December 1, 2025

¶21

Nitin Verma

¶22

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepayan Rai Alias Dwaipayan Roy vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another

Harendra Singh Panwar vs State of Up ANOther

Amit Singh Alias Lalu vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Jay Singh vs State of U.P. and Another