Allahabad High Court
BAIL/35009/2026 of SMT. ARTI DEVI Vs STATE OF U.P. on 7 October 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35009 of 2026 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Praveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35009 of 2026
Court No. - 68
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Praveen Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.212 of 2026, under Sections 109, 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Usahait, District- Budaun, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the FIR and her name has come up subsequently four months after the incident. As such, the applicant is entitled to bail. The statement of injured could not be recorded as he is in coma. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 6.6.2026. She undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhakar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Arti Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
consideration the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Smt. Arti Devi, be released on bail in the aforementioned case crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that she shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.
8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits. October 8, 2026 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 35009 of 2026 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad