Sachin Prajapati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sachin Prajapati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of as not pressed: liberty to appear before the court below within three weeks and file a bail application (to be decided per the guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil); no coercive process for three weeks or until appearance for bail, whichever is earlier; liberty to file a discharge application after disposal of the bail application; amendment of memo of appeal permitted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order taking cognizance dated 06.03.2026 and the consequential proceedings including charge sheet dated 19.12.2025 in Criminal Case No. 166 of 2026 (arising out of FIR No. 0228 of 2025, PS Sammanpur) ought to be quashed.

Ratio / Principle

Learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to amend the margin of the memo of appeal so as to add Criminal Case No. 166 of 2026 and score out the erroneously transcribed Criminal Case No. 228 of 2025.

Key takeaways

The appeal, not pressed by the appellant, is disposed of with liberty to the appellant to appear before the court below within three weeks and to move a bail application for the said offences.ratio¶¶21
If such a bail application is filed, it shall be heard and decided in terms of the guidelines issued in Satender Kumar Antil (supra).ratio¶¶21
For a period of three weeks, or until the appellant appears before the court below for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive process shall be adopted against the appellant by the court below.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Sachin Prajapati v. State of U.P. (Criminal Appeal No. 1321 of 2026, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J., decided 08.05.2026): Appeal sought quashing of the cognizance order dated 06.03.2026 and consequential proceedings including charge sheet dated 19.12.2025 in Criminal Case No. 166 of 2026 (State vs. Prabhat Kumar), arising out of FIR No. 0228 of 2025 under Ss. 115(2), 351(3), 352 BNS 2023 and Ss. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, PS Sammanpur, pending before the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar. After arguing at some length, counsel for the appellant did not press the appeal and prayed for directions that the court below consider the bail application in terms of the guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, with liberty to file a discharge application thereafter; the AGA raised no objection. Held: appeal disposed of with liberty to appear before the court below within three weeks and move a bail application, to be heard and decided per the Satender Kumar Antil guidelines; no coercive process for three weeks or until appearance for bail, whichever is earlier; liberty to file a discharge application after disposal of the bail application, to be heard and disposed of in accordance with law. Memo of appeal amended to substitute Criminal Case No. 166 of 2026 for the erroneously transcribed crime number.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1321 of 2026

Sachin Prajapati

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. And Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Rahul Verma,	Divya Maurya
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 27

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the margin of memo of appeal in place of Crimnal Case No. 166 of 2026, Criminal Case No. 228 of 2025 has been transcribed due to inadvertence and typographical error, therefore, he may be permitted to add Criminal Case No. 166 0f 2026 and score out crime no. 228 of 2025.

Learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to make amendment in the margin of memo of appeal as prayed for during the course of the day.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The instant criminal Appeal has been preferred to quash the order taking cognizance dated 06.03.2026 and consequential entire proceeding including charge sheet dated 19.12.2025 arising out in criminal case no. 166 of 2026 (State vs. Prabhat Kumar) arising out of FIR No. 0228 of 2025 under sections 115(2) (323 IPC), 351(3) (506 IPC), 352 (504 IPC ) of B.N.S. 2023 and under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sammanpur, District-Ambedkar Nagar, pending in the Court of Special Judge SC/ST Act Ambedkar Nagar.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in this case FIR was lodged by the appellant after a delay of 28 hrs. and 20 miniutes. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case . The police has not taken into consideration the version of the appellant during investigation. The offenses are punishable with a maximum term of seven years imprisonment. No case under Sections 3 (1) Da, Dha and 3(2) (VA) SC/ST Act is made out. learned court below issued process against the appellant in mechanical manner on the basis of charge-sheet filed in the case after investigation.

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in order to avoid further delay in the proceeding before the court below, the appellant is no longer inclined to press the present criminal appeal and prayed that some directions

CRLA No. 1321 of 2026

2

may kindly be issued to the learned court below to consider the bail application of the appellant in terms of guidelines issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022) 10 SCC 51 and the appellant may also be given liberty to file a discharge application after disposal of the bail application.

Learned A.G.A. raised no objection towards the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant.

In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the appellant to appear before the court below within three weeks from today and to move a bail application for the said offenses. If such an application is filed, the same shall be heard and decided in the terms of the guidelines issued in Satender Kumar Antil (supra) .

For a period of three weeks or till the appellant appears before the court below for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive process shall be adopted against the appellant by the court below.

The appellant is also granted liberty to file a discharge application after disposal of the bail application before the court below. If the same is moved, the same shall be heard and disposed of in accordance with law.

May 8, 2026 dk/

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench