Allahabad High Court

RAJESH MANI TRIPATHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

Both applications were dismissed as not pressed, and no quashing of the orders or proceedings was granted.

Summary

The applicant, Rajesh Mani Tripathi, filed two applications before the Allahabad High Court: one under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a July 30, 2026 order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate in a rape case (CrPC Section 376) and another under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the entire criminal proceeding (CrPC Sections 376, 406, 417, 418, 420, 506 IPC). The applicant later indicated that he did not wish to press the prayers on merits and merely wanted the trial court to decide his bail application promptly. The State opposed the applications but raised no substantive objection to the applicant’s request for a limited direction. The Court held that both applications were "not pressed" and therefore dismissed them without entertaining the merits. It further directed that if the accused surrenders before the trial court by October 9, 2026, his bail application should be considered and decided expeditiously.

Issues considered

Whether the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 30.07.2026 can be quashed under Section 528 BNSS.
Whether the criminal proceedings under Sections 376, 406, 417, 418, 420, 506 IPC can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Whether the applications are "pressed" and therefore maintainable.
Whether the Court should direct the trial court to decide the bail application expeditiously upon surrender.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 528
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 376, 406, 417, 418, 420, 506

Subjects

bail
quash
Section 528 BNSS
Section 482 CrPC
IPC sections 376,406,417,418,420,506
not pressed application
expeditious bail

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35845 of 2026

Rajesh Mani Tripathi
.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. and another
.....Opposite

Party(s)

Along with :
1. Application U/s 482 No. 29918 of 2023:
Rajesh Mani Tripathi
Versus
State of U.P. and another

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Indresh Kumar, Sanjay Kumar Pandey,
Tribhal Chandra Sharma, Ved Prakash Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. These two matters are connected together in compliance of the order
dated 08.09.2026 passed in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.35845 of
2026, Rajesh Mani Tripathi vs. State of U.P. and another.

3. Heard Sri Surendra Bahadur Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra
Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

Order on Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 35845 of 2026

4. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the
applicant with the following prayers:-

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 30.07.2026 passed by C.J.M.
Sant Kabir Nagar in Case No.5549 of 2023 Sarkar Versus Rajesh Mani
Tripathi in pursuance of Case Crime No.29 of 2023 under section 376,
NA528 No. 35845 of 2026
2

506 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Khalilabad District Sant Kabir Nagar.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindlyb e pleased to stay
the order dated 30.07.2026 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant
Kabir Nagar in Case No.5549 of 2023 Sarkar Versus Rajesh Mani
Tripathi in pursuance of Case Crime No.29 of 2023 under section 376,
506 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Khalilabad District Sant Kabir Nagar
and or further prayed the concerned court release of applicant on personal
bond in the light of Smt. Bacchi Devi Versus State of U.P. and others
during the pendency of aforesaid Criminal Application before this
Hon'ble Court, And/or pass such other and further order which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the
case."

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present petition be
dismissed as not pressed. Prayer is allowed.

6. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed as not pressed.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

Order on Application U/S 482 No. 29918 of 2023

8. This application under 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with
the following prayers:-

"It is, therefore, MOST RESPECTFULLY prayed that this Hon'ble Court
may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash entire
proceeding of Criminal Case No. 5549 of 2023 (State Versus Rajesh Mani
Tripathi) cognizance order dated 17.04.2023 of charge sheet dated
22.03.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 0029 of 2023, Under Section
376, 406, 417, 418, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Khalilabad, District
Sant Kabir Nagar.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to
stay further proceeding of Criminal Case No. 5549 of 2023 (State Versus
Rajesh Mani Tripathi) cognizance order dated 17.04.2023 of charge sheet
dated 22.03.2023 under Section 376, 506 1.P.C. arising out of Case Crime
No. 0029 of 2023, Under Section 376, 406, 417, 418, 420, 506 I.P.C.,
NA528 No. 35845 of 2026
3

Police Station Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending in the court
of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar, otherwise the applicant
shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

And/or to pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems
fit and proper."

9. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant states that he does
not want to press the prayers made in the present petition on merits and
submits that the purpose of the applicant would suffice if an order is
passed directing the trial court to decide the bail application of the
applicant, as expeditiously as possible.

10. Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments
of learned counsel for the applicant.

11. In view of the above, the prayer as prayed for is dismissed as not
pressed.

12. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and
looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicant, it is
directed that if the accused-applicant surrenders before the trial court
concerned on or before 09.10.2026 and applies for bail, the same shall be
considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

13. The present application is disposed of.

14. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

15. Records do not show passing of any interim order in favour of the
applicant. Further the order sheet of the matters shows that this matter
was listed twice before the Court i.e. 17.08.2023 and 16.10.2023 and on
17.08.2023 the matter was requested to be adjourned by learned counsel
for the applicant whereas on 16.10.2023 there was no appearance on
behalf of the applicant even in the revised list.

(Samit Gopal,J.)
September 23, 2026
Naresh

Digitally signed by :-
NARESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…