Nazir Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

Nazir Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of on the alternative, unopposed prayer: applicant to surrender within one month; bail application, if moved, to be decided expeditiously by the Trial Court after hearing the informant in view of Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773; no coercive measures for thirty days; benefit of order lost on failure to surrender within the period; liberty reserved to move a discharge application. Quashing prayer not pressed and not decided on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No.8729 of 2025 (State vs. Nazir Ahmad) arising out of Case Crime No.484 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, together with the charge-sheet dated 02.03.2025 and the summoning order dated 08.07.2025, were liable to be quashed (raised but not pressed and not decided on merits). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is directed to surrender before the concerned court within one month.

Key takeaways

If the applicant applies for bail, his bail application shall be disposed of expeditiously by the Trial Court in accordance with law, after hearing the informant, keeping in view the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773.ratio¶16
The order shall not be treated as an implied direction of the Court to grant bail; the court concerned remains at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.ratio¶17
Till the period of thirty days, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing (S.528 BNSS) — proceedings of Case No.8729 of 2025 (State v. Nazir Ahmad) arising out of Case Crime No.484 of 2024, u/ss 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Tarkulva, District Deoria, with charge-sheet dt. 02.03.2025 and summoning order dt. 08.07.2025 — quashing prayer not pressed on merits; confined to surrender and expeditious bail, unopposed by State — HELD: applicant to surrender within one month; bail application, if moved, to be disposed of expeditiously by Trial Court after hearing informant, keeping in view Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773; order not an implied direction to grant bail; no coercive measures for thirty days; benefit forfeited if surrender not made within period; liberty to move discharge application, to be decided by a well reasoned order. Application disposed of. (Sanjiv Kumar, J.)

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34079 of 2025

Nazir Ahmad

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another	.....	Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Shailendra Yadav, Sudhakar	Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 83

HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

Heard Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.8729 of 2025 (State vs. Nazir Ahmad) arising out of Case Crime No.484 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station Tarkulva, District Deoria as well as charge-sheet dated 02.03.2025 and summoning order dated 08.07.2025.

After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicant may be permitted to surrender and move bail application before the Trial Court and suitable directions may be issued that the same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance with law.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

In view of above, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court within one month from today and in

NA528 No. 34079 of 2025

2

case, he applies for bail, the bail application of the applicant shall be disposed of expeditiously by the Trial Court in accordance with law, after hearing the informant, keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773 .

It is made clear that this order shall not be treated as an implied direction of this Court to grant bail to the applicant and the court concerned shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance to law.

Till the aforesaid period of thirty days, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

In case, applicant fails to surrender before the Trial Court within the stipulated period of thirty days, he will not get benefit of this order.

The applicant is at liberty to move a discharge application at appropriate stage of trial and the Trial Court is expected to pass a well reasoned order, if any such application is moved by him.

With above directions this application stands disposed of .

(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)

April 23, 2026

Amit

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad