HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9310 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 1400 of 2023 arising out of FIR No. 0798 of 2021, under Section 419 and 420 of IPC, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lalganj Ajhara, District Pratapgarh as well as quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 14.08.2022 and also to quash the impugned cognizance and summoning order dated 17.05.2025. 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 him. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. 4. After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant wants to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction. 5. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amitabh Kumar Tripathi, Ashish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nitin Chandra Mishra @ Nitin Kumar And 6 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 6. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. November 4, 2025 Anurag A482 No. 9310 of 2025 2 (Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench