Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68979 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15050 of 2025 Applicant :- Meghraj Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Srivastava,Madan Lal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. 1. Heard Sri Himanshu Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kamleshwar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2868 of 2025, (State Vs. Meghraj) arising out of Case Crime No. 188 of 2024, under Sections 303(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, Police Station- Mirzapur, District- Saharanpur, as well as impugned charge sheet 10.12.2024 and impugned cognizance/summoning order 25.03.2025 passed by Judicial Magistrate II, Saharanpur. 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. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is, hereby, refused. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad