Allahabad High Court
DEEN DAYAL AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The High Court will not interfere with the FIR but directs that the lower court decide any bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil.
Summary
Petitioners Deen Dayal and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 25‑04‑2026 registered under IPC sections 137(2), 352 and 351(3) BNS. During the hearing the petitioners withdrew their challenge to the FIR and instead sought a direction that the lower court consider their bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The State’s counsel did not oppose this equitable request. The High Court refused the prayer to quash the FIR but disposed of the writ petition by directing that any bail application be decided by the trial court following the law laid down by the Apex Court. The interim order, if any, was discharged.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR dated 25‑04‑2026 can be quashed by a criminal miscellaneous writ petition.
- Whether the High Court can direct the lower court to decide a bail application based on the Supreme Court’s precedent in Satender Kumar Antil.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 137(2), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- FIR
- bail
- writ petition
- high court
- Supreme Court precedent
- jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10127 of 2026
Deen Dayal And 3 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Pandey, Ajay Mishra,
Shubham Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ajay Mishra, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned
A.G.A. for State/respondents- 1,2, 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioners- Deen Dayal And 3 Others has approached this Court by
means of present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated
25.4.2026 lodged by first informant/respondent-4- Manju Devi and
registered as Case Crime No. 0227 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 352, 351
(3) BNS, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Padrauna.
4. After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly gave up the
challenge to the impugned FIR. He submits that interest of justice shall
better be served, in case, a direction is issued by this court to Court below to
consider the bail application of petitioner in the light of law laid down by the
Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773.
5. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 does not oppose
the equitable submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioners.
6. In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition
is refused.
7. However, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that in
case, petitioner appears before Court below and applies for bail then his bail
CRLP No. 10127 of 2026
2
application shall be decided by Court below in the light of the law laid down
by Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (Supra).
8. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.
May 5, 2026
Arshad
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ARSHAD MAHMOOD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…