Disposed¶17

Ramesh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2026NA528/10892/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under S.528 BNSS dismissed as withdrawn with liberty; refusal of quashing of Criminal Case No. 294 of 2025 / Case Crime No. 20 of 2024, Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, PS Nagra, Ballia; cognizance/summoning order dated 18.01.2025 by CJM Ballia upheld; charge-sheet filed without arrest; offence punishable up to 7 years; liberty for regular bail; direction to consider bail per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51 category A; Allahabad High Court; Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; decided March 19, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with liberty to the applicants to withdraw it and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of the category-A observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51. ¶17

Ramesh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 294 of 2025 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.01.2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 20 of 2024 (Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, PS Nagra, District Ballia), should be quashed. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

The prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants to quash the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order is refused.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the applicants to withdraw the application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶12

Key takeaways

If a bail application is filed, it shall be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, regarding category-A accused (charge-sheet submitted on appearance): bail may be decided without taking the accused in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) disposed of an application under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 294 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 20 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia, along with the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.01.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia. Considering that the applicants were not arrested during investigation, the charge-sheet had been submitted, and the offence was punishable up to 7 years, the Court refused the quashing prayer but, on the applicants' request after some arguments, permitted withdrawal with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court. Any such bail application is to be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 regarding category-A accused (charge-sheet submitted on appearance), where bail may be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail till decision.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10892 of 2026

¶3

Ramesh Yadav And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Ashok Kumar Singh, Vijay Pratap Yadav : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 74

¶7

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

¶8

Sri Vijay Pratap Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 294 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 20 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Nagra, District- Ballia as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 18.01.2025, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

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 judgment 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

¶14

NA528 No. 10892 of 2026

¶15

¶16

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 expect a better exercise of discretion on the part of the court in favour of the accused.

¶17

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶18

March 19, 2026 Ishan

¶19

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Yadav and Another 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

Shahid @ Pappu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shri Vishal Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tribeni Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lal Bahadur @ Hari Shankar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishal Sharma Alias Banti and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Galib @ Mo Galib Ansari and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another