Allahabad High Court
INDRAWATI URF BINDRAWATI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed, but the Court directs that the lower court decide any bail application in accordance with Satender Kumar Antil, Section 480 of the BNS Act, and Kahkashan Kaushar v. State of Bihar.
Summary
Indrawati Urf Bindrawati Devi filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 04-04-2026 registered under Sections 85, 80(2) of the BNS Act and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act. During the hearing she withdrew the challenge to the FIR and instead sought a direction that the lower court consider her bail application in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The State, represented by the Advocate General, did not oppose this equitable request. The High Court refused the prayer to quash the FIR but disposed of the writ petition, directing that any bail application be decided by the lower court following the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil, Section 480 of the BNS Act, and the decision in Kahkashan Kaushar v. State of Bihar. The interim order, if any, was discharged.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can be granted in a writ petition that withdraws its challenge to an FIR and seeks direction for bail consideration?
- Whether the High Court can direct the lower court to decide bail in accordance with Supreme Court precedent and specific statutory provisions.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- FIR challenge
- criminal miscellaneous writ
- Section 480 BNS
- Supreme Court precedent
- Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10155 of 2026
Indrawati Urf Bindrawati Devi
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Alok Kumar Rai, Manoj Kumar Rai
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE PADAM NARAIN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Rai, the learned counsel for petitioner and the
learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1 to 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioner-Indrawati Urf Bindrawati Devi has approached this Court by
means of present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated
04.04.2026 lodged by first informant-respondent-4, Shri Ram and
registered as Case Crime No. 153 of 2026, under Sections, 85, 80(2) BNS
and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Geeda, District- Gorakhpur.
4. After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioner fairly gave up
the challenge to the impugned FIR. He submits that interest of justice
shall better be served, in case, a direction is issued by this court to Court
below to consider the bail application of petitioner in the light of law laid
down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau
of Investigation and another (2021) 10 SCC 773.
5. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-respondents 1, 2 & 3 does not
oppose the equitable submissions urged by the learned counsel for
petitioner.
6. In view of above, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ
petition is refused.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
CRLP No. 10155 of 2026
2
A.G.A. representing State-respondents 1 to 4 and upon perusal of record,
However, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that in
case, petitioner appears before Court below and apples for bail then his
bail application shall be decided by Court below in the light of the law
laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil
(Supra), court below shall further guided by the provisions contained in
Section 480 BNSS as well as the law laid down by Apex Court in the
Case of Kahkashan Kaushar Vs. State of Bihar.
8. Interim order, if any, stands discharged
(Padam Narain Mishra,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
May 5, 2026
Israr
Digitally signed by :-
ISRAR AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…