Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

MUNNA GAUTAM ALIAS MUNNAversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The application under Section 528 BNSS is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty granted to the applicant to seek regular bail.

Summary

The applicant, Munna Gautam, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the criminal proceedings (Crime No. 235 of 2023) filed under IPC sections 193, 211, 452, 427 and 511. He argued that he had not been arrested, the charge‑sheet was already filed and the offences carried a maximum imprisonment of seven years. During the hearing he withdrew the prayer to quash the case and instead requested regular bail, invoking the Supreme Court decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021). The Court dismissed the application as withdrawn, granted the applicant liberty to approach the trial court for bail, ordered that no coercive action be taken against him for 30 days, and directed the trial court to decide the bail application expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments. The order thus allows the applicant to seek bail while the criminal case proceeds.

Issues considered

  • Whether an application under Section 528 BNSS seeking to quash criminal proceedings can be entertained when the applicant withdraws the prayer.
  • Whether the Court can direct that no coercive action be taken against the applicant pending bail proceedings.
  • Whether the Court may direct the trial court to decide the bail application expeditiously.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • quash of criminal proceedings
  • Section 528 BNSS
  • IPC
  • coercive action
  • expeditious trial
  • withdrawal of application

Judgment

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

              APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8660 of 2026

Munna Gautam Alias Munna
                                                                .....Applicant(s)
                                       Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                   .....Opposite
                                                                         Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)           :    Harsh Tiwari, Yogesh Narayan Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)      :    G.A.

Court No. - 82
                   HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State

and perused the material on record.


2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash

the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 235 of 2023, under Sections 193,

211, 452, 427, 511 of IPC, Police Station- Kakadeo, District- Kanpur Nagar as

well as cognizance/summoning order dated 06.02.2025 along with bailable

warrant dated 14.10.2025.


3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was 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. After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has

submitted that he is not inclined to press the prayer as made in the application

under Section 528 BNSS and he is ready to appear before the trial court and

applies for regular bail and a direction may be issued to the trial court to

decide the bail application of the applicant expeditiously keeping in view the

law laid down in Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil

vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2021) 10 SCC 773.


5. Under the circumstances, the present application under Section 528 BNSS
                                                                                               NA528 No. 8660 of 2026
                                                                      2


                                    is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to applicant to approach the court

                                    concerned for bail. In order to enable the applicant to approach the court

                                    concerned for bail, for a period of 30 days, no coercive action shall be taken

                                    against the applicant. In case, the bail application is preferred by the applicant

                                    before the court concerned, the court concerned shall decide the same

                                    expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournment to any party. While

                                    considering the bail application of the applicants, the court below shall keep in

                                    mind the principles of law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs

                                    Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2021) 10 SCC 773.


                                    6. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

                                    March 19, 2026
                                    v.k. updh.
                                                                                         (Padam Narain Mishra,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY
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.