Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82827 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16530 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajjan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivakant Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. During the course of hearing learned counsel for the applicant corrected the prayer clause. Heard Sri Shivakant, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Saumya Madhyan, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record. The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3702 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 192 of 2024, under Sections 110, 117(2) of B.N.S. (Section 308, 325 of I.P.C.), Police Station- Asothar, District- Fatehpur, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 29.3.2025, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No. 3, Fatehpur. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that applicant is already on bail under Section 115(2), 352, 351(2) of B.N.S. (Section 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C.). Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants 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. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 A.P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad