Allahabad High Court
SINDHU KUMARI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is refused, and the lower court is directed to consider the petitioners' bail applications in light of Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI.
Summary
Petitioners Sindhu Kumari and another filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR dated 21‑02‑2026 under Section 87. After hearing, the petitioners voluntarily withdrew the relief sought but requested that the writ be disposed with a direction to the lower court to consider their bail applications in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022). The State’s Advocate General did not oppose this fair submission. The High Court found no legal impediment to the submission, refused the prayer for the writ, and ordered that any bail application by the petitioners be decided by the trial court following the precedent set by the Apex Court. The interim order, if any, was vacated.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR can be disposed with a direction to the lower court to consider bail applications per Supreme Court precedent.
- Whether the court can entertain a fair submission after the petitioners withdraw their original prayer.
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- bail
- writ petition
- FIR
- Supreme Court precedent
- direction to lower court
- justice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5565 of 2026
Sindhu Kumari And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhilesh Bharti, Kamlesh Prasad
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 49
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. Akhilesh Bharti, the learned counsel for petitioners and the
learned AGA representing State respondents 1,2 & 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioners Smt. Sindhu Kumari and another have approached this
Court by means of present Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition
challenging the FIR dated 21.02.2026 lodged by first informant
respondent 4 Ramawadh Gaud and registered as Case Crime No. 0039 of
2026, under Section 87 B.N.S., Police Station Seorahi, District
Kushinagar.
4. After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioners fairly gave
up the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition. It is however
contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that interest of justice
shall better be served in case the present writ petition is disposed of
finally with a direction to Court below to consider the bail application of
petitioners in the light of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of
Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another
(2022) 10 SCC 51.
5. Learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2&3 does not oppose
the aforesaid fair submission urged by the learned counsel for petitioners.
6. We do not find any legal impediment for not accepting the fair
submission urged by the learned counsel for petitioner.
CRLP No. 5565 of 2026
2
7. Accordingly, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition is
refused.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. for
State respondents 1,2&3, upon perusal of record and considering the
submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioner as noted herein
above, we dispose of this writ petition finally with a direction that in case
petitioners appear before Court below and apply for bail, then their bail
application shall be considered by Court below in the light of law laid
down by Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).
9. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
April 20, 2026
Arif
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…