Allahabad High Court
SHYAMA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- JAI PRAKASH TIWARI
Holding
The court allowed the bail application, granting bail to the applicant during the pendency of trial.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad considered a bail application filed by Shyama Devi, who was arrested in FIR No. 368 of 2025 under several IPC sections for allegedly selling a victim. She claimed innocence, stating the FIR was lodged by the victim herself and that co‑accused Rashid had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, but the court, after reviewing the record and noting the applicant’s lack of prior criminal history and the heavy pendency of cases, decided to grant bail without commenting on the merits. The court ordered release on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions such as not tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses. The order emphasized that the bail decision is limited to the application and does not affect the trial’s outcome.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused during the pendency of trial under the circumstances of the case
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses
- Whether the seriousness of the offences under the cited IPC sections warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 123, 140(4), 142, 143, 145, 351(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- false implication
- trial pendency
- sureties
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6559 of 2026
Shyama Devi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankit Kumar Pal, Pravin Kumar, Shad
Azam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
The present case has been taken up out of turn under the category of
mention cases.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-
respondent and perused the record of the case.
The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on
bail in Case Crime No. 368 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 123, 140(4),
351(2), 142, 143, 145 BNS, Police Station- Kamalganj, District-
Farrukhabad, during pendency of the trial in the court concerned.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is
absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to some ulterior motive. The present FIR has been lodged by victim
herself. There is allegation against the applicant that she along with co-
accused Raj and Rashid sold the victim to one Sunil. It is next submitted
that applicant is having no concern with the allegations levelled against
her and she has not committed any offence as alleged by prosecution. It is
next submitted that victim herself returned on 1.11.2025. Similarly placed
co-accused Rashid@ Raja has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 28.7.2026 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 25812 of 2026. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained
in the supplementary affidavit and rejoinder affidavit filed in support of
the instant bail application. The applicant is lady and she is languishing in
jail since 5.11.2025. 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.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.
BAIL No. 6559 of 2026
2
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record,
evidence and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments
advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view
that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of
the trial.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
Let applicant, Shyama Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following
conditions:-
(i). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii). The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed,
unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv). The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is
suspected.
(v). 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.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the
sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at
liberty to cancel the bail.
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 said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
September 9, 2026
KK Patel
Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…