Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:54906 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 12041 of 2025 Applicant :- Balister @ Ahmad Ullah Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kumar Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Sri Manoj Kumar, holding brief of Sri Gaurav Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Ladli Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. During the course of hearing learned counsel for the applicant correct the prayer clause. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1850 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2018, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 325, 308 of IPC, P.S. Khetasarai, District Jaunpur as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 19.09.2023 pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Court No. 12, Jaunpur. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have 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 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 :- 11.4.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad