Allahabad High Court
PREMLATAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI
Holding
The court held that the Section 528 application seeking non‑custodial appearance was not warranted and dismissed it, while permitting the applicant to seek regular bail in accordance with the Supreme Court’s Category A guidelines.
Summary
The applicant, Premlata, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking permission to appear for trial without being taken into physical custody in a criminal case involving offences under Section 318(4) of the B.N.S. Act and Section 66D of the I.T. Act. The applicant argued that he had not been arrested during investigation and that the charge‑sheet had already been filed, with the offences carrying a maximum imprisonment of seven years. The court examined the facts and the statutory framework and declined to grant the relief sought in the Section 528 application. The applicant was allowed to withdraw the application and file a regular bail petition before a competent court. The court directed that any subsequent bail application be decided in line with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, which permit bail without physical custody for Category A accused whose charge‑sheet has been filed. Consequently, the application was disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail petition.
Issues considered
- Whether an application under Section 528 of the BNSS can be entertained to allow the accused to appear for trial without being taken into physical custody after a charge‑sheet has been filed.
- Whether the court must follow the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI regarding bail for Category A accused.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. Act — s. 318(4)
- BNSS — s. 528
- I.T. Act — s. 66D
Subjects
- bail
- Section 528
- charge‑sheet
- custody
- Category A
- interim bail
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18787 of 2026
Premlata
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Niketa Sharma, Rahul Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Heard Sri Rahul Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material
on record.
The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed with a
prayer to issue a direction to permit the petitioner to face the trial without
taking into custody in Criminal Case No. 29224 of 2024, arising out of
Case Crime No. 08 of 2024, under Section 318(4) of B.N.S. and Section
66D of I.T. Act, P.S. Cyber Crime, District Hathras, pending in the court
of C.J.M. Hathras.
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. 18787 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
Checking your session…