Constable Mohit Pandey And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 1226 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Constable Mohit Pandey And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 June, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:94547
 
Court No. - 50
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10395 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Constable Mohit Pandey And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Dwivedi,Ratnesh Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Ratnesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri S.P. Maurya, learned brief holder for the State.

2. The present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed to quash the impugned summoning order dated 07.01.2025 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Amroha arising out of Complaint Case no. 8087 of 2024 (Irfan Ali vs. Mohit Pandey and another), under Sections 420, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Hasanpur, District Amroha, pending in the Court learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Amroha.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

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

5. 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.

6. 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 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.

7. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

Order Date :- 2.6.2025

Manoj