Allahabad High Court
SOHAIL ALIAS SOHILversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI
Holding
The application to quash the criminal proceedings under Section 528 is dismissed.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 78 of 2026) arising under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 352 and 351(2) of the same Act. The applicant argued that he had not been arrested and that the charge‑sheet had already been filed, contending that the offence carried a maximum imprisonment of seven years. The High Court examined the material and refused the prayer to quash the proceedings. The applicant was permitted to withdraw the application and was given liberty to file a regular bail application, which the Court said should be decided in line with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI regarding bail for "Category A" accused whose charge‑sheet is on record. The application was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the criminal proceedings is maintainable.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 117(2), 351(2), 352, 528
Subjects
- quash
- Section 528
- bail
- charge-sheet
- Category A
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29366 of 2026
Sohail Alias Sohil
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Maohammd Nadeem
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 77
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Heard Sri Mohammd Nadeem, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rahul
Pandey, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.
The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings
of Criminal Case No. 78 of 2026, arising out of Case Crime No. 527 of
2025, under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- ,
District- Kannauj as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 2.2.2026,
pending in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.)/Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Chhibramau, Kannauj.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested
during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted
against him. It is further submitted that the offence is 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. 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
NA528 No. 29366 of 2026
2
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.
September 8, 2026
T. Sinha
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
TRIPTI SINHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…