Allahabad High Court
HARSHITversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The High Court refused to interfere with the FIR but directed that the lower court decide the petitioner’s bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Satender Kumar Antil.
Summary
Petitioner Harshit filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 6 March 2026 registered under Sections 333, 109, 108(2), 352 and 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code. During the hearing, the petitioner withdrew his challenge to the FIR and instead sought a direction that the lower court consider his bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The State, represented by the Advocate General, did not oppose this equitable request. The High Court refused to entertain the original challenge to the FIR but, on a final basis, directed that any bail application filed by the petitioner be decided by the trial court applying the law laid down by the Apex Court. The interim order, if any, was discharged and the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court may direct a lower court to decide a bail application based on a Supreme Court precedent in a criminal miscellaneous writ petition.
- Whether the FIR can be challenged through a criminal miscellaneous writ petition.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 108(2), 109, 333, 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- FIR challenge
- criminal miscellaneous writ petition
- Supreme Court precedent
- Indian Penal Code
- High Court direction
- jurisdiction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10174 of 2026
Harshit
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ravi Pandey, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned
A.G.A. for State/respondents- 1,2, 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioner- Harshit has approached this Court by means of present
criminal misc. writ petition challenging the FIR dated 6.3.2026 lodged by
first informant/respondent-4- Pankaj and registered as Case Crime No. 61 of
2026, under Section 333, 109, 108(2), 352, 351(3) BNS, Police Station-
Harduaganj, District- Aligarh
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, 2,3 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. 10174 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…