HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37087 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Heard Sri Kuldeep Singh Vatsa, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Abhishek Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 668 of 2026, arising out of Case Crime No. 479 of 2020, under Sections 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Phoolpur, District- Prayagraj as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 23.6.2026, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate IVth, Prayagraj. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kuldeep Singh Vatsa Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Arif @ Jamal Uddin And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. October 6, 2026 T. Sinha NA528 No. 37087 of 2026 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- TRIPTI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad