Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86747 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18364 of 2025 Applicant :- Lalit Gautam And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Bhardwaj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Sri Pradeep Kumar Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 144 of 2025, (State Vs. Ravendra and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 334 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 452, 323, 307 of I.P.C., Police Station- Chatari, District- Bulandshahr, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 03.02.2025 pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Judicial Magistrate Khurja, Bulandshahr. The matter is not related to same set of act. 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 :- 22.5.2025 Ishan Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad