Allahabad High Court
RAHUL NISHAD AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI
Holding
The application to quash the proceedings was refused, and the applicants were permitted to withdraw the application and seek bail under the guidelines for Category A offences.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Case No. 315 of 2026) arising from a charge‑sheet filed under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2), 333 and 324(4) of the BNS. The counsel argued that the applicants had not been arrested and the offence carried a maximum imprisonment of seven years. The Court examined the material and refused the prayer to quash the proceedings. The applicants were allowed to withdraw the application and, if desired, file a regular bail application, which would be decided in accordance with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI regarding Category A offences. The application was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the proceedings under the charge‑sheet can be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS.
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused in a Category A case where a charge‑sheet has already been filed.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- quash of proceedings
- bail
- Category A offence
- charge‑sheet
- criminal procedure
- discretion of court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8053 of 2026
Rahul Nishad And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 74
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Heard Sri Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri
Alok Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
material on record.
The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to
quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 315 of 2026, (State Vs. Rahul
and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 69 of 2025, under Sections
115(2), 352, 351(2), 333, 324(4) of BNS, Police Station- Nagar, District-
Basti, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 28.01.2026, pending in
the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti.
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
NA528 No. 8053 of 2026
2
judgments 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 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 except 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.
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)
March 18, 2026
A.N. Mishra
Digitally signed by :-
AMARNATH MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…