Allahabad High Court
RAHUL PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI
Holding
The application to quash the proceedings was refused, and the applicant was permitted to file a regular bail application.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 14648 of 2024) arising from a charge under Section 67B of the Income Tax Act. The applicant argued that he had not been arrested and that the charge‑sheet had already been filed for an offence punishable with up to seven years’ imprisonment. The High Court examined the material and refused the prayer 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 accordance with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) regarding Category A offences, where bail may be granted without physical custody. The application was therefore disposed of with liberty to seek bail.
Issues considered
- Whether an application under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash criminal proceedings can be entertained when a charge‑sheet has been filed.
- Whether bail can be granted without physical custody for a Category A offence under Section 67B of the Income Tax Act.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 528
- Income Tax Act — s. 67B
Subjects
- bail
- Section 528
- quash proceedings
- charge‑sheet
- Category A
- Income Tax Act
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18780 of 2026
Rahul Prajapati
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Girja Shanker Sen, Krishna Dutt
Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Heard Sri K.D. Awasthi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Alok
Mishra, 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. 14648 of 2024, arising
out of Case Crime No. 534 of 2023, under Sections 67B of I.T. Act,
Police Station- Aonla, District- Bareilly as well as cognizance/
summoning order dated 20.09.2024, pending in the Court of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly.
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
judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs.
NA528 No. 18780 of 2026
2
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
Checking your session…