Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

DINESH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The application under Section 528 to quash the proceedings was refused, and the applicants were permitted to withdraw it and seek bail.

Summary

The applicants, Dinesh and four others, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 11304 of 2025) pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad. They argued that they had not been arrested and that a charge‑sheet had already been filed against them for offences punishable with up to seven years’ imprisonment. The Court examined the material and refused the prayer to quash the proceedings, allowing the applicants to withdraw the application and file a regular bail petition. The Court directed that any bail application be decided in line with the Supreme Court’s observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) regarding Category‑A cases, where bail may be granted without physical custody. Consequently, the application was disposed of with liberty to seek bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash pending criminal proceedings can be entertained when a charge‑sheet has already been filed.
  • Whether the applicants are entitled to bail without being taken into physical custody under the Category‑A framework laid down by the Supreme Court.

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 117(2), 191(2), 191(3), 333, 351(3), 352
  • BNSS — s. 528

Subjects

  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • Section 528
  • BNSS
  • bail
  • Category A
  • charge‑sheet
  • High Court of Allahabad

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

            APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8499 of 2026

Dinesh And 4 Others
                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                        Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                  :   Rupendra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)             :   G.A.

Court No. - 74
               HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

1. Heard Sri Rupendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and
Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material
on record.

2. The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to
quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 11304 of 2025 (State
versus Dinesh and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 450 of 2025 under
Sections 333, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 117(2) of B.N.S. Police
Station-Katghar, District-Moradabad as well as cognizance/summoning
order dated 20.11.2025 pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate-Moradabad.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not
arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been
submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offences are
punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

4. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made
by learned counsel for the applicants is, hereby, refused.

5. 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.

6. 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
judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs.
                                                                                             NA528 No. 8499 of 2026
                                                                     2


                                    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 expect a better exercise of discretion on the
                                    part of the court in favour of the accused.

                                    7. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty

                                    March 19, 2026
                                    SY
                                                                                    (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SWETA YADAV
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.