Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50835 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 11306 of 2025 Applicant :- Hari Mohan Niranjan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Tripathi, 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 the BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 682 of 2020, (State Vs. M.D. Asheesh Kumar NIranjan And Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 403 of 2019, under Sections .406, 420 of I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Konch, District- Jalaun, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 04.04.2023 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Konch. Learned counsel for the applicants 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. Learned A.G.A pointed out that this case is against the company who misappropriated the invested money of his customers and committed breach of trust and cheating with them. 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 :- 8.4.2025 PS Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad