Galib @ Mo Galib Ansari and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Galib @ Mo Galib Ansari and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (category A observations).

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 45720 of 2025 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.9.2025 ought to be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.

Court's answer

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order was refused.

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicants sought to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and the application stands disposed of with that liberty.

Key takeaways

This Court directed that if a bail application is filed by the applicants' counsel, it shall be decided in the light of the observations of the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, i.e., for category A accused (against whom charge-sheet has been 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, with a better exercise of discretion in favour of the accused. (The category-A content is the Supreme Court's observation relied upon, not this Court's independent ruling.)ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), March 18, 2026 — Application under S. 528 BNSS No. 8247 of 2026 by Galib @ Mo Galib Ansari and 9 others seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 45720 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 148 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 351(3), 352, 333 of B.N.S., P.S. Jangipur, District Ghazipur) and the cognizance/summoning order dated 18.9.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghazipur: the quashing prayer was refused; on counsel's request after arguments, the application was withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court, and was disposed of accordingly. Any such bail application is to be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 — category A (accused against whom charge-sheet submitted on appearance): bail may be decided without physical custody or by granting interim bail till decision, with better exercise of discretion in favour of the accused.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8247 of 2026

Galib @ Mo Galib Ansari And 9 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ram Bali Ram
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 74

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Ram Bali Ram, learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. Saumya Madhyan, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 45720 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 148 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 351(3), 352, 333 of B.N.S., Police Station- Jangipur, District- Ghazipur as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 18.9.2025, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ghazipur.

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.

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

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.

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

NA528 No. 8247 of 2026

2

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.

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

March 18, 2026 T. Sinha

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

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