Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

SUNIL KUMAR SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita to quash the criminal proceedings was dismissed.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 6218 of 2019, which involved offences under Sections 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant argued that he was never arrested and that the charge‑sheet had already been filed, contending that the offence carried a maximum imprisonment of seven years. The Court examined the material and rejected the prayer to quash the proceedings, noting that the filing of a charge‑sheet does not render the case liable to be dismissed under Section 528. The applicant was permitted to withdraw the application and was given liberty to file a regular bail application, which would be decided in line with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI regarding Category A bail applications. The application was therefore disposed of without any order of quash.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 can be entertained to quash criminal proceedings when a charge‑sheet has already been filed.
  • Whether the applicant is entitled to bail without physical custody under the Supreme Court’s Category A guidelines.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • Section 528
  • Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
  • bail
  • charge-sheet
  • Category A bail
  • Supreme Court precedent
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Sections 323, 504, 506

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32484 of 2026

Sunil Kumar Sharma
                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                   .....Opposite
                                                                         Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                          :    Vikas Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                     :    G.A.

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

Heard Sri Vikas Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri
Kamleshwar Singh, 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 applicant to quash the entire proceedings
of Criminal Case No. 6218 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 289 of
2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506, I.P.C., Police Station- Phulpur, District-
Prayagraj as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 12.12.2019,
pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Allahabad.

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. 32484 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.

                                    October 1, 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.