Disposed¶13

Saurabh Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Mar 2025NA528/7966/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under S. 528 BNSS 2023 (Allahabad High Court, Varanasi) refused; withdrawal allowed with liberty for regular bail. Charge-sheeted accused (not arrested during investigation) in Case Crime No. 372 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506, 354(A) IPC, PS Badagaon, District Varanasi; cognizance/summoning order dated 19.11.2022 by ACJM Court No. 5, Varanasi not disturbed; offence punishable up to 7 years imprisonment; future bail application to be decided per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51 category A guidelines (bail without physical custody or interim bail; better exercise of discretion in favour of accused).

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction. ¶13

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No. 231835 of 2022 (State Vs. Saurabh Pandey), arising out of Case Crime No. 372 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506, 354(A) IPC, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 19.11.2022 should be quashed. +1 more

¶7

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances, the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 231835 of 2022 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 19.11.2022 is refused.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant was permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶10

Key takeaways

Direction that any bail application filed shall be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51: for category A accused (against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance), bail may be decided without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided, with a better exercise of discretion in favour of the accused.obiter¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), order dated 11.3.2025 in Application under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 No. 7966 of 2025. Saurabh Pandey sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 231835 of 2022 (State Vs. Saurabh Pandey), arising out of Case Crime No. 372 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506, 354(A) IPC, Police Station Badagaon, District Varanasi, and of the cognizance/summoning order dated 19.11.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Varanasi. Held: the prayer to quash was refused; after some arguments, counsel was permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, which shall be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — for category A accused (charge-sheet submitted on appearance), bail may be decided without taking the accused into physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided, with a better exercise of discretion in favour of the accused. Application disposed of.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35263

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7966 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Saurabh Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh,Uday Nath Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Sri Uday Nath Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rahul Pandey, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 231835 of 2022, (State Vs. Saurabh Pandey), arising out of Case Crime No. 372 of 2022, under Sections 504, 506, 354(A) of I.P.C., Police Station- Badagaon, District- Varanasi as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 19.11.2022, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Varanasi.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against him. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

¶9

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is, hereby, refused.

¶10

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.

¶11

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 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

¶12

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.

¶13

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 MAA/-

¶14

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

Saurabh Pandey v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Pandey 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases