Allahabad High Court

RAMCHARAN @ GOLUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 22 April 2026
Bench: SANJIV KUMAR

Holding

The court declined to quash the proceedings and instead ordered the applicant to surrender within thirty days and to have his bail application heard expeditiously.

Summary

The applicant, Ramcharan @ Golu, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the cognizance and charge sheet in a criminal case (Sections 504, 506, 306 IPC). The counsel later limited the prayer to seeking permission to surrender and to have a bail application heard expeditiously. The State, represented by the Advocate General, raised no objection. The High Court directed the applicant to surrender within thirty days, after which he may file a bail application to be disposed of promptly, citing the Supreme Court guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The order expressly stated it was not an implied direction to grant bail and that coercive measures would not be taken during the period. The application was consequently disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the application to quash the cognizance and charge sheet under Section 528 BNSS should be entertained.
Whether the court can direct the applicant to surrender and seek an expeditious bail hearing as an alternative relief.

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 528, 582
Indian Penal Code — s. 306, 504, 506

Subjects

bail
surrender
quash of criminal proceedings
Section 528 BNSS
Section 582 BNSS
IPC Sections 504, 506, 306
expeditious hearing
Supreme Court guidelines

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35538 of 2025

Ramcharan @ Golu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suneel Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Janardan Yadav

Court No. - 83
HON'BLE SANJIV KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Suneel Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri,
Prince Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Janardan Yadav, learned
counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the material available on record.

2. This application under Section 582 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the
applicant to quash the entire proceeding of impugned
cognizance/summoning order dated 08.07.2025, passed by Judicial
Magistrate Court No. 22 Azamgarh as well as charge sheet dated 29.01.2025
in Case Crime No. 0464 of 2024, under Sections 504, 506, 306 IPC (State
Vs. Ramcharan @ Golu), Police Station- Jiyanpur, District Azamgarh,
pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 22, Azamgarh.

3. After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the
applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and
he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicant may be permitted to
surrender and move bail application before the Trial Court and suitable
directions may be issued that the same may be heard and decided
expeditiously, in accordance with law.

4. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

5. In view of above, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by
learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicant shall
surrender before the concerned court within one month from today and in
NA528 No. 35538 of 2025
2

case, he applies for bail, the bail application of the applicant shall be
disposed of expeditiously by the Trial Court in accordance with law, after
hearing the informant, keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the
Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation and another, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.

6. It is made clear that this order shall not be treated as an implied direction
of this Court to grant bail to the applicant and the court concerned shall be at
liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance to law.

7. Till the aforesaid period of thirty days, no coercive measures shall be
taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

8. In case, applicant fails to surrender before the Trial Court within the
stipulated period of thirty days, he will not get benefit of this order.

9. Therefore, the applicant is may move his discharge application and in case
any such application is being filed, same shall be heard and decided
expeditiously after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of
a reasoned and speaking order.

10. With above directions this application stands disposed of.

(Sanjiv Kumar,J.)
April 23, 2026
Nisha

Digitally signed by :-
nisha kumari
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…