Matul Gupta and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Matul Gupta and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer to quash the proceedings and cognizance/summoning order refused; application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, to be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 8480 of 2025 (State versus Matul Gupta and Others), arising out of F.I.R. No. 0261 of 2024, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.08.2025 pending before the Judicial Magistrate II, Ballia, should be quashed under Section 528 of BNSS.

Court's answer

The prayer made by the applicants to quash the criminal proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order was refused upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case.

Ratio / Principle

The application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the applicants to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and stands disposed of accordingly.

Key takeaways

This Court directed that, in case 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 (Category A: accused against whom charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance may be released without physical custody or by interim bail).ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.): Application under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 8480 of 2025 (State v. Matul Gupta and Others), arising out of F.I.R. No. 0261 of 2024 dated 27.08.2024 under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. (old Sections 147, 323, 507, 504 IPC), Police Station Ubhaon, District Ballia, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 13.08.2025 of the Judicial Magistrate II, Ballia. Held: prayer refused; on the applicants' counsel's request, the application was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court, which shall be decided in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 (Category A — charge-sheeted accused appearing without arrest may be considered for bail without physical custody or via interim bail). Application disposed of on March 19, 2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8599 of 2026

Matul Gupta And 4 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Om Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 74

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Heard Sri Om Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 8480 of 2025 (State versus Matul Gupta and Others), arising out of F.I.R. No. 0261 of 2024 dated 27.08.2024 under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), B.N.S. (old sections 147, 323, 507 and 504 I.P.C.) at Police Station-Ubhaon, DistrictBallia as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 13.08.2025, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate II, Ballia.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offences are 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.

NA528 No. 8599 of 2026

2

Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 , wherein the Supreme Court considering the category(A) as mentioned in the paragraph 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 19, 2026 SY

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad