Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71418 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 12202 of 2025 Applicant :- Veerpal Alias Veerpal Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar,Surita Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,S.M. Iqbal Hasan Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri S.M. Iqbal Hasan, learned counsel for the private oppostie party and Sri R.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application u/s 528 BNSS has been filed with prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 2043 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 307 of 2023, under Sections 323, 336, 427, 325, 308 IPC, P.S. Junawai, District Sambhal as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 03.05.2024, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (S.D.)/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandausi. Learned counsel for the applicants does not want to press the present application for applicant nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely, Veerpal @ Veerpal Singh, Ashok @ Ashok Kumar and Jaindra Pal @ Jayendra. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely, Veerpal @ Veerpal Singh, Ashok @ Ashok Kumar and Jaindra Pal @ Jayendra 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 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 for the applicant nos. 1, 3 and 4. Learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the cognizance order against the applicant no. 2, Nanak @ Nanik has been passed without considering the facts and circumstances and the position of law. It is further submitted that charge sheet has not been submitted against the applicant no. 2, Nanak @ Nanik but the cognizance order has been passed including the applicant no. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon a judgment of Apex Court in State of Gujarat Vs. Girish Radhakrishnan Varde (2014) 3 SCC 659, wherein it has been observed that since the instant case is based on the FIR lodged before the police, the correct stage for addition or subtraction of the sections will have to be determined at the time of framing of charge. Learned counsel for the private opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State have not denied the factual position of the case. In view of the above facts and circumstances and keeping in mind the law laid down in State of Gujrat (supra), present application is liable to be allowed for applicant no. 2, hence, application is allowed for applicant no. 2 and remand back the case to decide afresh for applicant no. 2 only. Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Nisha Digitally signed by :- nisha kumari High Court of Judicature at Allahabad