Allahabad High Court
MADHAV @ ARJUN MINOR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- MADAN PAL SINGH
Holding
The appeal was disposed of, granting the appellants liberty to file a bail application within 20 days and staying any coercive action.
Summary
The appellants, minors, filed a criminal appeal under Section 14A‑1 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, seeking to quash the cognizance and proceedings of a Sessions case involving offences under the Indian Penal Code and the SC/ST Act. They did not contest the merits but requested liberty to file a bail application in the trial court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022). The State did not oppose this request. The High Court, applying the Supreme Court’s bail principles, allowed the appellants to surrender and file a bail application within 20 days, directing that no coercive action be taken against them during that period. The appeal was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellate court can stay or quash the cognizance order and direct the trial court to consider a bail application under the Supreme Court’s precedent.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 351(3), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A-1, 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- criminal appeal
- quash of cognizance
- coercive action
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4600 of 2026
Madhav @ Arjun Minor And 3 Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Rajesh Kumar Singh Chauhan, Shriyansh
Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AGA for the State-
respondent.
2. By means of the present criminal appeal under Section 14A-1 of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,
the appellant has prayed for quashing of the cognizance/summoning order
dated 4th April, 2026 as well as entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 277
of 2026 (State of U.P. Vs. Anshu & Others), arising out of Case Crime No.
0189 of 2025 under Sections 115 (2), 352, 351 (3) of B.N.S. and Sections 3
(1) (r), 3 (1) (s) and 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Biwar, District-
Hamirpur, pending in the Court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Hamirpur.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that he
does not wish to press the merits of the case, rather he seeks liberty to file an
appropriate application before the concerned trial court and a direction to the
learned Trial Court to decide the bail application of the appellants in light of the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI,
reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51.
4. Learned AGA for the State has not opposed the submissions made by
learned counsel for the appellants.
5. In light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding grant
of bail to an accused, the appellants are granted liberty to file bail application
before the concerned trial court. If the appellants surrender before the trial
court and apply for bail within 20 days from today, the same shall be
considered and decided by the trial court in accordance with law at the
earliest, if possible on the same day.
6. For a period of 20 days or till the date of surrender of the appellants before
CRLA No. 4600 of 2026
2
the trial court, no coercive action shall be taken against the appellants.
7 . With the aforesaid observation, the present criminal appeal is disposed of.
May 6, 2026
Sushil/-
(Madan Pal Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…