HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39295 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Sri Arvind Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.N. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1655 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 992 of 2012, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 336 of I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Mathura, as well as non-bailable warrants dated 28.07.2025 has been issued against the applicant, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist, Mathura. The delay in filing of the present application is explained. 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. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is, hereby, refused. 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. In case bail application is filed by the learned counsel for the applicant, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgment Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sheob @ Saheb .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. October 17, 2025 Ishan NA528 No. 39295 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad