PARMATMA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1974 of 2026

Parmatma And 2 Others
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)              :     Sandeep Kumar Chaturvedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)         :     G.A.

Court No. - 75
                       HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the
applicant(s) and Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused
the record.

3. Notice issued to the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 20.02.2026
has been served personally as per office report dated 05.05.2026. Despite
service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 even
when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.

4. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicant(s) Parmatma, Gunjeshwar and Krishna, with the prayers
to quash the charge sheet dated 12.10.2025 along with
cognizance/summoning order dated 27.10.2025 as well as entire
proceeding in Special Session Trial No. 2258 of 2025 (State Vs.
Parmatma and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0202/2025, under
sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 131 BNS and section 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va)
SC/ST Act, Police Station Kolhui, District Maharajganj, pending in the
court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Maharajganj and with a further prayer
to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, during the pendency
of the present application.

5. Perused the explanation of the CJM, Maharajganj which was called for
vide order dated 27.04.2026. No further order needs to be passed with
regards to the same.

6. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant(s) states that the
purpose of the applicant(s) would suffice if an order is passed directing
the trial court to decide the bail application of the applicant(s), as
expeditiously as possible. He further states that although the prayer has
been made for quashing and staying the proceedings of the aforesaid case
                                                                                            NA528 No. 1974 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    but he does not press the same.

                                    7. Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments
                                    of learned counsel for the applicant(s).

                                    8. In view of the above, the prayer for quashing and staying the further
                                    proceedings of the aforesaid case is dismissed as not pressed.

                                    9. However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case
                                    and looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicant(s), it
                                    is directed that if the accused-applicant(s) surrenders before the trial court
                                    concerned by 20.05.2026 or earlier and apply for bail, the same shall be
                                    considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

                                    10. The present application is disposed of.


                                                                                                (Samit Gopal,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    M. ARIF




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