Ravi Bhushan Maurya @ Rahul Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ravi Bhushan Maurya @ Rahul Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of: liberty to the applicant to appear before the trial court within two weeks and file a bail application, to be decided expeditiously in view of Satender Kumar Antil (supra); further opportunity at the appropriate stage to move a discharge application, to be disposed of by the trial court by a speaking and reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2024, the chargesheet under Sections 379 and 420 IPC, and the summoning order dated 24.07.2025 passed by ACJM-5, Lucknow, together with consequential proceedings, should be quashed as illegal, arbitrary and an abuse of the process of law. +2 more

Court's answer

The quashing application was not entertained on merits and was disposed of on the terms stated (liberty for bail per Satender Kumar Antil and opportunity to seek discharge), rather than the criminal proceedings being quashed.

Ratio / Principle

As counsel for the applicant did not press the quashing application, the Court directed that if the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and files a bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

Key takeaways

The applicant will have an opportunity at the appropriate stage to move an application for discharge taking all factual and legal pleas available to him; if moved, the trial court shall dispose of it by a speaking and reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HC (Lucknow Bench) (Shree Prakash Singh, J.), Application U/S 482 No. 4008 of 2026, decided 13.05.2026: Applicant sought quashing of entire criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2024 (State v. Abhishek Kumar and others), the chargesheet under Sections 379, 420 IPC (Annexure 1) and the summoning order dated 24.07.2025 of ACJM-5, Lucknow (Annexure 2), alleging innocence, enmity-driven implication and inability to appear before the trial court. Counsel for the applicant did not press the application and sought liberty to file a bail application to be decided in view of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, to which the AGA raised no objection. The Court disposed of the application, providing that if the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and files a bail application, it shall be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil (supra), and that the applicant may thereafter move a discharge application raising all factual and legal pleas, which the trial court shall decide by a speaking and reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4008 of 2026

Ravi Bhushan Maurya @ Rahul Maurya

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Another	Home Lko. And	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Rajesh Kumar, Shukla	Himadri Goswami, Vivek
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

Instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2024 (State v. Abhishek Kumar and other), Chargesheet under Section 379,420, IPC, (the impugned Chargesheet contained herein as Annexure No. 1) submitted by the concerned police against the present applicant and all consequential proceedings thereof, which are presently pending before the learned Court of ACJM-5, Lucknow, (impugned summoning order dated 24.07.2025 contained herein as Annexure No. 2), as the same are illegal, arbitrary, and an abuse of the process of law.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and was never involved in committing the offence as has been mentioned in the first information report. He added that due to enmity, his name has been planted in the first information report and thereafter he has been chargesheeted. He next added that due to unavoidable circumstances, he could not appear before the trial court.

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press the application and seeks liberty to file bail application before the learned trial court which may be decided in view of law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022)10 SCC 51.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants.

On due consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for the parties', it is provided that in case, the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks

A482 No. 4008 of 2026

2

from today and file bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously in view of law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

Further, the applicant will have an opportunity at the appropriate stage to move an application for discharge taking therein all the pleas factual and legal which may be available to him, in accordance with law. In case, such an application is moved before the learned trial court, the learned trial court shall dispose of the same by a speaking and reasoned order strictly, in accordance with law.

The application is disposed of accordingly.

May 13, 2026 AKS

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench