HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15718 of 2026 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rajendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. Present application has been preferred seeking quashing of order dated 20.03.2026 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal whereby application preferred at the behest of applicants under Section 91 BNSS in Case No.4188 of 2024 (State Vs. Gaurav and others), arising out of Case Crime No.141 of 2024, under Section 452, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Bahjoi, District Sambhal, was rejected. Further prayer to direct the learned court concerned to accept the bail bonds on behalf of applicants in light of decision of this Court passed in Smt. Bachchi Devi Vs. State of U.P. [Application U/S 528 BNSS No.6400 of 2025]. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submitted that without considering the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022 SCC OnLine SC 825) as well as by this Court in Smt. Bachchi Devi (supra), application preferred at the behest of applicants under Section 91 BNSS, was rejected by learned court concerned vide impugned order which is bad in the eye of law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for applicants by way of submitting that vide order dated 27.08.2025, this Court has already rejected Anticipatory Bail Application No.6748 of 2025 preferred at the behest of applicants and directed them to surrender before learned court concerned and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dileep Kumar Shukla, Shikhar Neelkanth Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sunita And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) file regular bail but without availing the said liberty, applicants preferred applicants under Section 91 BNSS which was rejected vide impugned order and as such, the same is just and proper. 5. 5. After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties and without going into merit of the matter, order dated 20.03.2026 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal whereby application preferred at the behest of applicants under Section 91 BNSS is quashed and applicants are hereby directed to surrender before learned court concerned within a period of three weeks and prefer bail application which shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (surpa) and Smt. Bachchi Devi (supra). Till three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants herein in pursuance of aforesaid case. 6. It is also made clear that the bail bonds which have been proposed to be preferred by applicants, shall be considered by learned court concerned while adjudicating the bail application which shall be preferred by the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the instant application is hereby disposed of. April 20, 2026 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 15718 of 2026 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad