Ravi Saini And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 11976 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ravi Saini And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 October, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori, Abhishek Kumar

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:191455

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39321 of 2025

Ravi Saini And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

Vijay Kumar Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Heard Sri Vijay Kumar Pandey, 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 the B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3718 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 766 of 2021, under Sections 420, 167, 120-B of I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffar Nagar as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 08.02.2023 as well as order dated 31.03.2023, whereby Non- Bailable Warrant has been issued, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar.

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 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. 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 31, 2025

MAA/-