Allahabad High Court
PREMA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Prema Devi in Criminal Case No. 367 of 2025, where the prosecution relied solely on circumstantial evidence and no eye‑witness to the death of the victim. The applicant contended that there was no incriminating material against her, that co‑accused Ramesh Chandra and Sonveer had already been released on bail, and highlighted her gender, lack of criminal history, and the filing of a charge‑sheet. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual matrix. Relying on the parity with co‑accused, the nature of the offence, overcrowded jails, and Supreme Court precedents, the court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits. The order directed the applicant to furnish a personal bond, two sureties, and comply with conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, ensuring cooperation, and refraining from further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case based solely on circumstantial evidence with no eyewitness.
- Whether the release of co‑accused on bail creates a parity ground for granting bail to the applicant.
- Whether the applicant's gender, clean criminal record, and the filing of a charge‑sheet justify bail.
- Whether the presence of a charge‑sheet eliminates the need for custodial interrogation.
Subjects
- bail
- circumstantial evidence
- parity
- gender
- overcrowded prisons
- charge sheet
- conditions of bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19296 of 2026
Prema Devi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Singh Yadav, Sanjay Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sanjay Kumar Yadav
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Deepak Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri
Roshan Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release
the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 367 of 2025,
under Sections 103(1), 61(2)(A) B.N.S., Police Station Kurawali,
District Maipuri.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that it is case of
circumstantial evidence. There is no eye-witness of the incident and
the deceased was found outside his house in serious condition;
thereafter he was brought to hospital; subsequently he died. Counsel
for the applicant submitted that there is no eye-witness of the
recovery nor there is any incriminating material on pointing out of
applicant. It is further submitted that the co-accused Ramesh
Chandra and Sonveer have already been released on bail by a co-
ordinate bench this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No.23380 of 2026 vide order dated 27.07.2026 and Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No.31176 of 2026 vide order dated 03.09.2026,
respectively. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released
on bail on the ground of parity. It is further submitted that the
applicant is a lady. Applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is
BAIL No. 19296 of 2026
2
in jail since 22.08.2025. He further submitted that charge sheet has
been filed by the police, therefore, there is no requirement for
custodial interrogation. In case the applicant is released on bail, she
will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned
A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not
dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties; taking into account
that the co-accused Ramesh Chandra and Sonveer have already
been released on bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court; and
taking into account the fact that applicant is a lady and also
keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the
accused and also taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy
pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as
considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the
case of Kapil Wadhawan vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the
applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail
application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant - Prema Devi involved in the aforementioned
crime be released on bail, on her furnishing a personal bond and
two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court
concerned, with the following conditions:-
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 him from disclosing such facts
to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely
without seeking any adjournment.
BAIL No. 19296 of 2026
3
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of
the bond executed by her.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties
be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis
of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the
official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the
concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will
be filed within 15 days.
10. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release
order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System
(BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or on e-prison
portal and Trial Court via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of
the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for
Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021
decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 as well as
Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of Jharkhand
and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025,
decided on 29.05.2026.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 8, 2026
CS/-
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…