Akhtar Jamal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Akhtar Jamal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, such application to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v.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

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. UPMA 04033553 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 201 of 2024 under Sections 323, 336, 34 IPC, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.11.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau, should be quashed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants (for quashing the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order) is refused.

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

In case a bail application is filed by the applicants, it shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, i.e., the category A observations (at paragraph 2 thereof) that bail applications of accused against whom 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. The description of category A reproduces the cited precedent; this court's own direction is that the future bail application be decided in light of those observations.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Order dated 12.3.2025 in Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 8103 of 2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:36078): Applicants sought quashing under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. UPMA 04033553 of 2024 (State Vs. Akhtar Jamal and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 201 of 2024, under Sections 323, 336, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mau, and of the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.11.2024 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau. It was pointed out that the applicants were not arrested during investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against them, and the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. The quashing prayer was refused; counsel was permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court, and it was directed that any such bail application be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A: charge-sheet submitted on appearance; consideration without physical custody or with interim bail). Application disposed of.