Shamshad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Mar 2026NA528/721/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 528 BNSS quashing application disposed of as not pressed; cognizance/summoning order 20.12.2025 and charge sheet 01/2025 in FIR 81/2025 (Ss. 318(4)/351(2)/352/3(5) BNS 2023, P.S. Jankipuram, Lucknow) not quashed; surrender within three weeks; bail to be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (AIR 2022 SC 3386); interim protection from coercive action for three weeks; single judge Brij Raj Singh, J.; decision dated March 11, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of as not pressed on merits; applicants protected from coercive action for three weeks, with a direction that upon surrender within that period their bail application be decided expeditiously by the trial court in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. ¶¶19

Shamshad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the non-speaking cognizance and summoning order dated 20.12.2025 and the charge sheet No. 01/2025 dated 30.09.2025 in FIR No. 81/2025 should be set aside/quashed in respect of the applicants.

¶¶11

Court's answer

Learned counsel for the applicants did not press the application on merits; the applicants undertook to surrender before the trial court and apply for bail.

¶¶13

Ratio / Principle

In case the applicants surrender before the court below within three weeks and prefer a bail application, the trial court shall decide the bail application as expeditiously as possible, taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

¶¶17

Key takeaways

For a period of three weeks from the date of the order, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Brij Raj Singh, J. — Application under Section 528 BNSS (No. 721 of 2026) by Shamshad and another seeking setting aside of a non-speaking cognizance and summoning order dated 20.12.2025 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow, and quashing of charge sheet No. 01/2025 dated 30.09.2025 in Case Crime (FIR) No. 81/2025 under Sections 318(4)/351(2)/352/3(5) BNS-2023, P.S. Jankipuram, District Lucknow (State of U.P. Vs. Ankul Kumar and others). After arguing at length, counsel for the applicants did not press the application on merits and undertook that the applicants would surrender and apply for bail. The Court disposed of the application, directing that if the applicants surrendered within three weeks and preferred a bail application, the trial court would decide it expeditiously in accordance with Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, AIR 2022 SC 3386, and that no coercive action be taken against the applicants for three weeks.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 721 of 2026

Shamshad And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kunwar Ravi Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 16

¶8

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ayush Khare, Sri Abhishek Mishra and Sri Saubhagya Mishra, Advocate(s), who have filed their power today on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

¶10

The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed seeking following main relief(s):-

¶11

"i. Set aside the non-speaking cognizance and summoning order dated 20.12.2025 passed by Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom) : Lucknow in connection of Case No. 172699 of 2025; Case Crime (FIR) No. 81/2025; Under Section : 318(4)/351(2)/352/3(5) B.N.S-2023; Police Station : Jankipuram; District : Lucknow (State of U.P. Vs. Ankul Kumar and others) in the interest of justice with regards to applicants.

¶12

ii. To quash the charge sheet No: 01/2025 dated 30.09.2025; : FIR No. 81/2025; U/S 318(4)/351(2)/352/3(5) Β.N.S-2023 & Police Station: Jankipuram; District: Lucknow (State of U.P. Vs. Ankul Kumar and others) only in respect of present applicants in the interest of justice."

¶13

After arguing at length, learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this application on merits. However, he submits that the applicants will surrender before the trial court and apply for bail. He prays that the applicant may be granted the benefit of the case of

¶14

NA528 No. 721 of 2026

¶15

¶16

Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (AIR 2022 SC 3386).

¶17

It is, therefore, directed that in case the applicants surrenders before the Court below within three weeks from today and prefer bail application, the trial court will decide the said bail application, as expeditiously as possible, taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

¶18

For a period of three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶19

The application stands disposed of .

¶20

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶21

March 11, 2026

¶22

Mohit Singh/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shamshad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamshad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

Similar cases

Yaswant Kumar Maurya @ Yaswant Maurya and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pankaj Kumar Tiwari vs the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Lucknow and Another

Amit Alias Amit Kumar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Govt. Lucknow and Another

Smt. Manjula Tiwari vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 8 Others

Zaki Ahmad and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Himanshu Sunilkumar Dubey vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another