Allahabad High Court
GEETA SAINIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The Court refused to enlarge bail to the applicant at this stage of the trial.
Summary
Geeta Saini, accused in a 2024 case under sections 109(1), 3(5) and 93 of the B.N.S. for allegedly burying a newborn female child, applied for bail while in custody since November 6, 2024. She claimed innocence, argued that the FIR was based on overheard information, that there was no material linking her to the burial, and invoked parity with a co‑accused, Narendra, who had been granted bail, as well as the protective provision of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. for women. The State opposed, contending that the offence amounted to female infanticide, a heinous crime, and that the parity argument was inapplicable. After hearing both sides, the High Court held that the seriousness of the alleged crime and the lack of sufficient justification precluded bail at this stage. Consequently, the application for bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case of alleged female infanticide pending trial
- Whether the principle of parity with a co‑accused who obtained bail is applicable
- Whether Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides a special right to bail for a female accused in this circumstance
- Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- female infanticide
- parity
- Section 437 CrPC
- heinous offence
- criminal procedure
- Uttar Pradesh
- newborn child
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9112 of 2026
Geeta Saini
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Hasham, Syed Faiz Hasnain
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 70
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and perused the material on record.
2. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case
Crime No. 289 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 3(5), 93, 3(5) of B.N.S.,
P.S. Nakhasa, District-Sambhal and is in jail since 6.11.2024, is seeking
enlargement on bail during the trial.
3. 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. He next submitted that the first information
report was lodged on the basis of overheard information and there is no
material to show that the applicant had buried the infant in the field, even
no one has come forward to support the prosecution case. He also
submitted that similarly placed other co-accused Narendra has already
been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated
28.10.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26017 of 2025, and
since the role of the applicant-accused is similar to that of other co-
accused Narendra, she is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground
of parity. He further submitted that the applicant is a lady and she is also
entitled to be given the benefit under the provision of Section 437 Cr.P.C.
4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and
submitted that the new born child (female), mother and father unknown
was admitted to Combined District Hospital, Sambhal on 3.11.2024 with
report "Low birth weight Hypotherinia". The new born child was
BAIL No. 9112 of 2026
2
admitted with the help of Ganga Dei, wife of Sompal Singh and Akhtar,
son of Subhan. The new born child was found in the field of Manoj, son
of Dal Chand. The said child was buried in the field. The said child was
allegedly born from the relationship of applicant Geeta Saini, daughter of
Chandrapal Saini and Narendra, son of Mahendra. The applicant was
unmarried and therefore, the said girl child was buried by herself and
Narendra in the agricultural field, the incident has been supported by one
Kiran Pal, whose statement is annexed at page no. 36 to the affidavit
accompanying bail application. Learned A.G.A. has further submitted
that the crime committed by the accused-applicant is of heinous nature, as
much as the new born girl child was buried in the field for the fear of
being defamed in the society and a crime related to female infanticide.
He lastly submitted that the parity claimed by the accused-applicant is not
applicable in the given facts and circumstances, hence the bail application
of the accused-applicant is liable to be rejected.
5. After having heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for
the parties and perused the material brought on record, this Court is not
inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage of trial.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
March 24, 2026
Faridul
Digitally signed by :-
FAREEDUL HASAN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…