Mukesh Verma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 11249 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Mukesh Verma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 October, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:176940
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34148 of 2025   
 
   Mukesh Verma And Another    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State of U.P. and Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Amit Kumar Pandey, R.V. Pandey   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 75
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.     

Sri Amit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Chhavi Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. 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. 169 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 95 of 2024, under Sections 190, 191(1), 191(2), 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Chilla, District- Banda as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 24.1.2025, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Banda.

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 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.

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

October 7, 2025

T. Sinha