Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

RULI NISHAD AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The application under Section 528 to quash the proceedings was refused and the matter was disposed, with liberty to file a bail application.

Summary

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 97432 of 2025) pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, where they were charged under several IPC provisions and the BNS Act. The applicants argued that they 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, allowing the applicants to withdraw the application and to file a regular bail application. The Court directed that any bail application be decided in line with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) regarding Category A accused, permitting bail without physical custody. The application was therefore disposed of with liberty to seek bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether the application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the criminal proceedings is maintainable.
  • Whether bail can be granted to Category A accused without physical custody after a charge‑sheet has been filed.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • quash proceedings
  • Section 528
  • Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
  • bail
  • Category A accused
  • charge‑sheet
  • High Court of Allahabad

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30592 of 2026

Ruli Nishad And 8 Others
                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                   .....Opposite
                                                                         Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                                :    Neeraj Pal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                           :    G.A.

Court No. - 77
               HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Heard Sri Neeraj Pal, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Abhishek
Kumar, learned A.G.A. 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 applicants to quash the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 97432 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime
No. 222 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 352, 115(2), 351(3), 351(2), 131,
BNS, Police Station- Maharajpur, District- Kanpur Nagar as well as
cognizance/summoning order dated 5.7.2025, pending in the Court of
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Kanpur Nagar.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested
during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted
against them. 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 applicants is, hereby, refused.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicants 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 applicants, 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. 30592 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


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.