Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25755 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39249 of 2024 Applicant :- Vinod Chauhan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Yadav,Satya Narayan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Sri Arun Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 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. 380 of 2024 (State Vs. Vinod Chauhan and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 119 of 2022, under Sections 323, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Dohrighat, District- Mau as well as cognizance/ summoning order 16.11.2023 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/FTC/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau. 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 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. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 MAA/- Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad