Allahabad High Court
SMT RANU @ KUSMAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to Smt Ranu @ Kusma under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, on behalf of Smt Ranu @ Kusma, who had been in custody since 25‑12‑2025 in a case involving multiple serious offences. The applicant claimed innocence, pointed to her name appearing only in a co‑accused’s confessional statement, and highlighted that other co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the lack of a specific role assigned to the applicant and the non‑dangerous nature of the injuries to police personnel. After weighing the totality of facts, the nature of the offences, and the risk of trial delay, the court found the case fit for bail without expressing any view on the merits. Accordingly, the court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond of Rs 50,000 with two sureties and imposed standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 given the nature of the charges.
- Whether the applicant’s presence in the case as a co‑accused warrants denial of bail on grounds of flight risk or tampering with evidence.
- Whether procedural permission to delete the second applicant from the parties is required.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- co‑accused bail
- conditions of bail
- presumption of innocence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12183 of 2026
Smt Ranu @ Kusma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Durga Prasad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Sri Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P.
Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicants with a
prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 275 of 2025, under
Sections 3(5), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 310(2), 115(2), 352, 132,
121(1), 118(1), 127(2), 324 BNS and Section 7 CLA Act, registered at
Police Station Kurana, District Hamipur during pendency of the trial.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to
delete the name of the applicant no. 2 from the array of parties as she has
already filed separate bail application.
4. Prayer aforesaid is allowed. He may do so during course of day.
5. Now the application survives only in respect of applicant no. 1-Smt.
Ranu@Kusma.
6. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case and
she has been languishing in jail since 25.12.2025. It is further submitted
that name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of
co-accused Ujail Babu. It is further submitted that co-accused Pushpa and
Shyamkali have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this
BAIL No. 12183 of 2026
2
Court vide order dated 15.4.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 11587 of 2026 and another co-accused Smt. Gita has also
been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.4.2026 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12910 of 2026. It is also submitted
that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and none of the
injuries has been found to be dangerous to life. It is also submitted that
the applicant undertakes that she will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It
has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in
the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
7. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the applicant.
8. Co-accused Pushpa and Shyamkali have already been granted bail by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court and another co-accused Smt. Gita has
also been granted bail by this Court and name of the applicant has
surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Ujail Babu. No
specific role has been assigned to the applicant and none of the injuries of
the police personnel has been found to be dangerous to life.
9. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected
from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I
find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is
ALLOWED.
10. Let the applicant- Smt Ranu @ Kusma involved in the aforesaid case
crime shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.
50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the Court concerned :-
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police
officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witnesses.
BAIL No. 12183 of 2026
3
(iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on
the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii)
recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not
seek any unnecessary adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when
the witnesses are present in the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date
fixed, either personally or through their counsel.
12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground
for cancellation of bail.
13. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose
of determination of this bail application and will, in no way, be construed
as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be
absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of
evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
April 20, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK AGRAHARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…