Sanjeev Kumar Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sanjeev Kumar Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application finally disposed of with directions: if the applicants appear before the court below (Special Judge (Gangsters Act)/Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Mahoba) within three weeks and apply for bail/recall of the non-bailable warrant, their application shall be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil, Siddharth and Aman Preet Singh; execution of the non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance for three weeks or till appearance, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the non-bailable warrant issued and proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. initiated against the applicants by orders dated 6.4.2026 and 18.4.2026 in Special Case No. 64 of 2011 ought to be quashed.

Court's answer

The application under Section 528 BNSS is finally disposed of with a direction that if the applicants appear before the court below within three weeks and apply for bail/recall of the non-bailable warrant, their application shall be decided in the light of the observations made in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth v. State of U.P., 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 941.

Ratio / Principle

Execution of the non-bailable warrant against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance for three weeks from the date of the order or till the applicants appear before the court below, whichever is earlier.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing - Application under Section 528 BNSS to quash orders dated 6.4.2026 and 18.4.2026 in Special Case No. 64 of 2011 (case crime No. 1173 of 2011, Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Mahobkanth, District Mahoba) whereby a non-bailable warrant was issued and Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings initiated against the applicants - Applicants contended they were on bail when the NBW was issued and that no summons or bailable warrant preceded it - Held, application finally disposed of: if the applicants appear before the Special Judge (Gangsters Act)/Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Mahoba within three weeks and apply for bail/recall of the NBW, the application shall be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth v. State of U.P. 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh v. CBI 2021 SCC OnLine SC 941 - Execution of the NBW kept in abeyance for three weeks or till appearance, whichever is earlier (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18535 of 2026

Sanjeev Kumar Singh And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Jai Singh Parihar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 76

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Jai Singh Parihar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed to quash the orders dated 6.4.2026 and 18.4.2026 passed in Special Case No. 64 of 2011, arising out of case crime No. 1173 of 2011, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Mahobkanth, District Mahoba, whereby Non Bailable Warrant as well as proceeding under Section 82, Cr.P.C. have been issued and initiated against the applicants, pending in the court of Special Judge (Gangsters Act)/Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Mahoba.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants were on bail at the time of issuing of Non-Bailable Warrant. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without satisfying itself that the summon and other process for attendance has been served. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without considering the position of law. It is settled position of law that N.B.W. should be issued as a last resort after the litigant fails to respond the notices/summons and bailable warrant. It is further submitted that non-bailable warrant has been issued without issuing any summon and bailable warrant.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.

Considering submissions of learned counsel and perusing record, the instant application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is finally disposed of with a direction that in case applicants appear before the

NA528 No. 18535 of 2026

2

court below within three weeks from today and apply for bail/recall of non bailable warrant, his application 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, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Another 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director 2021 SCC Online SC 941.

For a period of three weeks from today or till applicants appear before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant against applicants shall be kept in abeyance.

May 5, 2026 T. Sinha

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad