Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

JANARDAN YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The court dismissed the application as not pressed and ordered that any bail application filed after surrender be decided expeditiously.

Summary

Janardan Yadav filed an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S. seeking to quash and stay the criminal proceedings (Session Case No. 432 of 2026) against him, alleging irreparable loss if the case proceeded. During the hearing, counsel for the applicant clarified that he no longer wished to press the quash and stay prayers and only desired that the trial court decide his bail application as quickly as possible. The State had no objection to this limited request. The High Court held that, since the original prayers were not pressed, the application could not be entertained and dismissed it, directing that if the accused surrenders before 07‑10‑2026 and files a bail application, the trial court must consider it expeditiously. The application was consequently disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 BNSS seeking quash of proceedings can be dismissed when the applicant withdraws that prayer and only seeks expeditious bail consideration
  • Whether the court may dismiss the application as not pressed

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 351(3), 352, 528
  • S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act — s. 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(2)Va

Subjects

  • bail
  • Section 528 application
  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • stay of trial
  • expeditious bail
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 40658 of 2026

Janardan Yadav
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Kundan Kumar Prasad, Manvendra
                                Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Manvendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri
V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

3. 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
graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire
proceeding of Session Case No.432 of 2026 (State of U.P. Vs. Janardan
Yadav), arising out of case crime no. 31 of 2026, under sections 115(2),
352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha and 3(2)Va of
S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Police Station Maniar, District Ballia, as well as
charge sheet No. 037/2026 dated 09.04.2026 and cognizance/summoning
order 20.05.2026 passed by Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Ballia, pending
in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, (S.C./S.T.) Act,
Ballia, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to
stay the further proceeding of Session Case No.432 of 2026 (State of U.P.
Vs. Janardan Yadav), arising out of case crime no. 31 of 2026, under
sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha and
3(2)Va of S.C./S.T. )P.A.) Act, Police Station Maniar, District Ballia,
pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge,
(S.C./S.T.) Act, Ballia, during pendency of present application before this
Hon'ble Court, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and
injury this Hon'ble Court."

4. 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
                                                                                            NA528 No. 40658 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    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.

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

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

                                    7. 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 07.10.2026 and applies for bail, the same shall be considered and
                                    decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

                                    8. The present application is disposed of.

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


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




Digitally signed by :-
NARESH KUMAR
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.