Nitesh Kumar Gond And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 11814 ALL

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 11814 ALL
Judgement Date : 28 October, 2025

Allahabad High Court

Nitesh Kumar Gond And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 28 October, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:188436

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38322 of 2025

Nitesh Kumar Gond And Another

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

Ram Chandra Kushwaha

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Sri Ram Chandra Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pusp Raj 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 applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 8805 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 163 of 2024, under Sections 363, 120-B of I.P.C., Police Station- Lar, District- Deoria, as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 16.07.2025, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) F.T.C. Ist,/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoria.

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.