Brijesh Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 4558 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Brijesh Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 August, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:139122
 
Court No. - 74
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7653 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Yadav
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anupama Tripathi,Rakesh Kumar Tripathi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
 

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 36039 of 2024 (Shashi Kala vs. Brijesh Kumar Yadav and others) as well as cognizance/ summoning order 30.11.2024, under Section 494 of I.P.C., Police Station- Cholapur, District- Varanasi, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No. 10, Varanasi.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits 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 applicant is, hereby, refused.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant, 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 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.

Order Date :- 14.8.2025

A.P. Pandey