Pavan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Pavan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the proceedings refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022)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

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3433 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 486 of 2010 (Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 384 IPC), along with the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.06.2012 and the subsequent non-bailable warrant and Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings, could be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant to quash the proceedings was refused by this Court.

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the applicant withdrew the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

Key takeaways

This Court directed that in case a bail application is filed by learned counsel for the applicant, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI & Anr., (2022) 10 SCC 51, wherein category A (accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance) is considered; the passage describing category A treatment in paragraph 12 is quoted precedent language and is recorded as a citation, not as this Court's own holding.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; Order dated 10.3.2025) disposed of Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 5721 of 2025 (described in the body as an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) filed by Pavan Kumar against the State of U.P. and Another. The application sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3433 of 2010 (State Vs. Pramod and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 486 of 2010, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 and 384 of I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Etah, together with the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.06.2012 and the orders of 06.12.2024 whereby the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah initiated a non-bailable warrant and proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. It was noted that the applicant had not been arrested during investigation and the charge-sheet had been submitted against him, the offence being punishable up to seven years. The prayer to quash was refused. After some arguments, counsel withdrew the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent jurisdiction, and it was directed that any such bail application be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A). The application stands disposed of accordingly.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35877

Court No. - 75

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5721 of 2025

Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mehrotra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Sri Rahul Mehrotra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3433 of 2010 (State Vs. Pramod and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 486 of 2010, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 384 of I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District- Etah, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 15.06.2012 and 6.12.2024, whereby the non-bailable warrant as well as proceedings 82 Cr.P.C. has been initiated by Chief Judicial Magistrate Etah.

Learned counsel for the applicants 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 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 applicant is, hereby, refused.

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.

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 judgments 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 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 except 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.

Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Akram

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