Allahabad High Court
ARUN KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is refused, but the High Court directs that any bail application be decided by the trial court in line with Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
Summary
Arun Kumar Singh filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging an FIR dated 09‑04‑2026 that alleged offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel withdrew the main relief sought but requested that the court direct the trial court to decide any bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The State’s Additional Government Advocate raised no objection to this request. The High Court refused the writ petition but ordered that, should the petitioner apply for bail before the lower court, the bail application must be decided following the legal principles laid down in the Satender Kumar Antil case. The interim order, if any, was discharged, and the petition was disposed of finally.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal miscellaneous writ petition can be used to direct a lower court to decide a bail application in accordance with a Supreme Court precedent.
- Whether the High Court should entertain the petition challenging the FIR under the cited IPC sections.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 351(3) BNS, 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal miscellaneous writ petition
- FIR
- Indian Penal Code
- Supreme Court precedent
- High Court direction
- Satender Kumar Antil
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10136 of 2026
Arun Kumar Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar Singh, Sanjay Vikram
Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Vikram Singh, the learned counsel for petitioner and
the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 & 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioner-Arun Kumar Singh has approached this Court by means of
present criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated 09.04.2026
lodged by first informant-respondent-4 Vijendra Singh, Managar of
Gomati Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. and registered as Case Crime No.
0092 of 2026, under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 352,
351(3) BNS, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Jaunpur.
4. After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly gave up
the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition. It is, however,
contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that in the facts and
circumstances of the case, interest of justice shall better be served, in
case, the present writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to
Court concerned to decide 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. Learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 & 3 has no objection to the
aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner.
6. In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ
CRLP No. 10136 of 2026
2
petition is refused.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. for
State-respondents 1, 2 & 3, upon perusal of record and considering the
submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioner, this writ petition
shall stand disposed of finally with a direction to Court concerned that in
case, petitioner appears before Court below and applies for bail then his
bail application shall be decided by Court concerned in the light of the
law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil
(Supra).
8. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.
May 5, 2026
Vinay
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
VINAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…