Disposed¶19

Raj Kumar Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2026NA528/1576/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application u/s 528 BNSS (Allahabad HC, Lucknow Bench, Shree Prakash Singh, J., decided 22-04-2026) against POCSO/BNS chargesheet No. 01/2025 dated 12.08.2025 and summoning order dated 22.01.2026 (Case No. 185/2026, Case Crime No. 0352/2025, PS Kotwali Nagar, Raebareli) not pressed; disposed of with liberty to appear before trial court within two weeks and file bail application to be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51; AGA no objection.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the applicant to appear before the trial court within two weeks and file a bail application, which shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). ¶19

Raj Kumar Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the applicant to appear before the trial court within two weeks and file a bail application, which shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned Chargesheet No. 01/2025 dated 12.08.2025 and the Summoning Order dated 22.01.2026 in Case No. 185/2026 should be quashed. +1 more

¶11

Court's answer

The application is disposed of, the applicant having not pressed the quashing prayer and having sought liberty to file a bail application before the trial court, with no objection from the learned A.G.A.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

If the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and files a bail application, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 16 — Shree Prakash Singh, J. Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 1576 of 2026 (Raj Kumar Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 others), decided April 22, 2026. Application under S. 528 BNSS prayed for quashing of Chargesheet No. 01/2025 dated 12.08.2025 (S. 75 BNS, old S. 354A IPC; S. 9f/10 POCSO Act) and the Summoning Order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions & Special Judge, POCSO First, Raebareli, in Case No. 185/2026 ('State Vs Raj Kumar Pal'), arising out of Case Crime No. 0352/2025 (S. 75 BNS, old S. 354A IPC & 7/8 POCSO Act), Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli. Counsel for the applicant did not press the application and sought liberty to file a bail application before the trial court; the learned A.G.A. had no objection. Held: the application is disposed of with the direction that if the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and files a bail application, it shall be considered and decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1576 of 2026

Raj Kumar Pal

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Shamsher Ali, Udai Vir
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 16

¶9

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶10

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

¶11

Instant application has been filed with the prayer for quashing of the impugned Chargesheet No. 01/2025 dated 12.08.2025. under sections-75 B.N.S. (Old Section 354A I.P.C.). & Section 9f/10 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli, and Summoning Order Dated 22.01.2026, passed by Learned Additional Sessions & Special Judge, POCSO First, Raebareli, in Case No. 185/2026, 'State Vs Raj Kumar Pal, arising out of Case Crime No. 0352/2025, under section 75 B.N.S. (Old Section 354A I.P.C.) & 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District-Raebareli.

¶12

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.

¶13

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

¶14

NA528 No. 1576 of 2026

¶15

¶16

Investigation and another (2022)10 SCC 51.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

The application is disposed of accordingly.

¶20

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶21

April 22, 2026 AKS

¶22

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

Raj Kumar Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

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

Similar cases

Faisal Khan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ashish Pandey and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ponam Saroj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Shazeb Khan @ Shahzeb Khan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rohit Mishra @ Rohit Kumar Mishra and 9 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Zeba Bano vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P.Govt. Lko. and 7 Others