HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8501 of 2026 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. 1. Heard Sri P. K. Sahani, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Puspraj Singh, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 33 of 2026 arising out of Case Crime No. 206 of 2023 under Sections 34, 323, 325, 504, 506, 341 I.P.C. against the applicant nos. 1 to 4 and under Sections 34, 323, 325, 504, 506, 341 and 120-B I.P.C. against applicant nos. 5 and 6, Police Station- Madhuban, District-Mau as well as cognizance order dated 02.01.2026 pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Mau. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offences are punishable up to 7 years imprisonment. 4. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants is, hereby, refused. 5. 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. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar Sahani Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shiv Kumar Yadav And 5 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. March 19, 2026 SY NA528 No. 8501 of 2026 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SWETA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad