Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

MOHD SALMANversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided

Holding

The application to quash the proceedings is dismissed, and the applicant may file a bail application subject to the Supreme Court’s Category‑A guidelines.

Summary

The applicant, Mohd Salman, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 38472 of 2023) arising from offences under IPC Section 420 and IT Act Sections 66 and 66D. He argued that he had not been arrested and that the charge‑sheet had already been filed, with the offences carrying a maximum imprisonment of seven years. The High Court examined the material and refused to quash the proceedings, allowing the applicant to withdraw the application and file a regular bail petition. The Court directed that any bail application be decided in line with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51, which permit bail for Category‑A accused without physical custody when a charge‑sheet is filed. Consequently, the application was disposed of, granting liberty to seek bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 BNSS to quash criminal proceedings can be entertained when a charge‑sheet has been filed.
  • Whether bail can be granted to a Category‑A accused without physical custody after the filing of a charge‑sheet.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • charge‑sheet
  • Category A
  • IPC 420
  • IT Act
  • Supreme Court precedent
  • Section 528 BNSS

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18643 of 2026

Mohd Salman
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State of U.P.
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                     :   Shamsuddin Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                :   G.A.

Court No. - 76
                 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Heard Sri S.Z. Khan, Advocate holding brief of Sri S.U. Khan, learned
counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the material on record.

The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to
quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 38472 of 2023, arising
out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2021, under Section 420 IPC and Section 66
and 66D of I.T. Act, P. S. Cyber Crime, District Moradabad as well as
cognizance/ summoning order dated 12.09.2023, pending in the Court of
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Moradabad.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested
during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been
submitted against him. 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 applicant is, hereby, refused.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant,
the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the
                                                                                          NA528 No. 18643 of 2026
                                                                   2


                                    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.


                                    May 6, 2026
                                    MAA/-

                                                                                   (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.