Allahabad High Court
GEETA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court held that the accused’s age, gender, and six‑month pre‑trial detention warranted the grant of bail despite the serious nature of the allegations.
Summary
Geeta Devi, a 65‑year‑old woman, was arrested in connection with the murder of her husband under a non‑bailable offence (Criminal Case No. 173 of 2026). She alleged that the accusations were false, claiming the deceased’s habitual liquor consumption led to a family dispute during which her sons assaulted him, resulting in his death. The applicant’s counsel highlighted her advanced age, lack of prior criminal record, and six months already spent in custody, arguing these factors justified bail. The State’s counsel did not contest the factual narrative but opposed bail on general grounds. The bench, after considering the applicant’s personal circumstances and the absence of any substantive objection to the facts, granted bail without commenting on the merits of the murder charge. Bail was conditioned on personal bond, sureties, appearance before the trial court, and non‑interference with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused, a 65‑year‑old woman, is entitled to bail in a non‑bailable offence under Section 103(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure despite serious murder allegations.
- Whether the applicant’s age, gender, lack of prior record, and period of pre‑trial detention justify the grant of bail.
Subjects
- bail
- non‑bailable offence
- Section 103
- age
- gender
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
- Allahabad High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27028 of 2026
Geeta Devi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 65
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Rejoinder affidavit filed by applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri S. B. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri S. K. Pandey, learned
counsel for the applicant and Sri R. N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the
State-respondent.
3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 173 of 2026, under Sections 103(1) BNS, Police
Station Ramgarhtaal, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial in the
court below.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however applicant is wife
of the deceased and as per allegation she alongwith her two sons by causing
injuries committed the murder of the deceased but entire allegations levelled
against the applicant are totally false.
5. He further submitted that actually deceased used to consume liquor and
therefore, very often dispute arose between him and his family members
including applicant and on the date of incident again he came after
consuming liquor and therefore, dispute arose and during dispute the sons of
the applicant made assault due to which he sustained injuries and died and as
applicant is his wife and he also opposed him for consuming liquor,
therefore, her another son who was not even present at spot also disclosed
the name of the applicant in the FIR of the present case.
6. He further argued that being lady and wife of deceased there was no
occasion for the applicant to make assault upon the deceased.
BAIL No. 27028 of 2026
2
7. He further submitted that even applicant is aged about 65 years of age and
she is having no previous criminal history and in the present matter she is in
jail since 25.3.2026 i.e. for last six months.
8. He further submitted that therefore, considering the facts of the case,
applicant may be released on bail.
9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute
the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
11. However, applicant is wife of the deceased and as per allegation she
alongwith her two sons by causing injuries committed his murder but
considering the age of the applicant and the fact that she is lady and she is in
jail for last almost six months, in my view, applicant is entitled to be
released on bail.
12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
13. Let the applicant-Geeta Devi, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless
her personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper
with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be
at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the
bail of the applicant.
15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts
brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the
BAIL No. 27028 of 2026
3
said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during
trial.
September 16, 2026
Ankita
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…