Om Prakash Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Om Prakash Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for quashing refused; however, on counsel's request the application was withdrawn and disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, any such application to be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of the Criminal Case arising out of Case Crime No. 408 of 2024 (State vs. Om Prakash Tiwari and another) under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352, 118(1) of B.N.S. and the cognizance/summoning order dated 06.01.2025 pending before A.C.J. (S.D.)/A.C.J.M., Kannauj should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, on learned counsel's request, the application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and the application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed by counsel for 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 (Category A: bail without physical custody, or interim bail till the bail application is decided). The operative direction is this court's; the description of Category A is quoted from the precedent and is not this court's own holding.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) — Application under S. 528 B.N.S.S., 2023 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:36102, Order Date 12.3.2025) by Om Prakash Tiwari and another to quash the entire proceedings of the Criminal Case arising out of Case Crime No. 408 of 2024 under Ss. 115(2), 351(2), 352, 118(1) B.N.S. (corresponding to Ss. 323, 506, 504, 324 IPC), PS Kotwali Tirwa, Kannauj, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 06.01.2025 of A.C.J.(S.D.)/A.C.J.M., Kannauj. The court refused the quashing prayer (para 9). Counsel thereafter sought withdrawal, and the application was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent jurisdiction (paras 10, 13), any such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — whose Category A guidance (charge-sheet submitted on appearance; bail without physical custody or interim bail till decision) the court reproduced from the Supreme Court's judgment (paras 11–12). Counsel had submitted that the applicants were never arrested, a charge-sheet stood filed, and the offence was punishable up to 7 years (para 8).

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36102

Court No. - 75

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8121 of 2025

Applicant :- Om Prakash Tiwari And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhil Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Sri Akhil Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri R.K.Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case arising out of Case Crime No. 408 of 2024 (State vs. Om Prakash Tiwari and another), under Sections 115 (2), 351(2), 352, 118(1) of B.N.S. (323, 506, 504, 324 IPC), Police Station- Kotwali Tirwa, District- Kannauj as well as cognizance/ summoning order 06.01.2025 pending in the Court of A.C.J. (S.D.)/A.C.J.M., Kannauj.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted against them. 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 applicants is, hereby, refused.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicants 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 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 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 :- 12.3.2025 MAA/-

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