Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49118 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36963 of 2024 Applicant :- Baljit Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deeksha Gupta,Siddharth Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nitesh Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Shri Siddharth Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Nitesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the private opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5151 of 2024, (State Vs. Bajlit Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 475 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420 of I.P.C., Police Station- Nizamabad, District- Azamgarh, as well as cognizance / summoning order 12.03.2024, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Azamgarh. 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 judgment 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 expect 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. Order Date :- 5.4.2025 RKM Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad