PRAMILAversusSTATE OF U.P.

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 10296 of 2026

Pramila
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State of U.P.
                                                               .....Opposite
                                                                     Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Kuldeep Kumar Dube
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)              :   G.A.

Court No. - 71
                 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the

State and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the

applicant in Case Crime No.197 of 2026, under Sections 351(3), 352, 109,

115(2) B.N.S., P.S.- Tejibazar, District- Jaunpur, with a prayer to enlarge

her on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends her arrest in the

above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant is a

lady and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The F.I.R. has

been lodged with the allegation that the named accused assaulted the

injured who is the mother-in-law of the informant. There is no medical

examination report of the mother-in-law of the informant on the record.

Later, an improvement was made that the informant and her mother-in-

law were both assaulted by the accused and an injury report of the

informant Sandhya Devi has been prepared which shows four injuries.

None of the injuries have been opined to be dangerous to life. Learned

counsel has further submitted that there are cross versions and Case

Crime No. 198 of 2026 has been registered by the applicant against the
                                                     NABAIL No. 10296 of 2026
                               2


injured Sandhya, the informant of the present case and five other named

accused. The investigation is pending and the applicant is being

pressurised by the police on account of the fact that she is a lady and a

homemaker.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail

and has contended that the applicant is the nominated accused. The

injured Sandhya Devi has received a fracture in the right forearm. No

indulgence may be granted to her and this application may be dismissed.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the

parties and perused the material brought on the record.

6. There appear to be cross versions of the incident. The applicant is a

lady. The F.I.R. does not speak of the injured Sandhya Devi receiving any

injuries in the occurrence. From the perusal of the bail rejection order, it

appears that the injury report of Sandhya Devi alone is on the record and

no injury report of Asha is available. On a pointed query made to the

Learned A.G.A., he has also not been able to point out any injury report

of Asha who has been shown as one of the injured.


7. Taking note of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, especially

the fact that the applicant is a lady, I deem it appropriate to grant

anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Pramila, she shall be released

forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a

personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the
                                                                                         NABAIL No. 10296 of 2026
                                                                     3


                                    following conditions:-

                                    i. the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police

                                    officer as and when required;

                                    ii. that 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police

                                    officer;

                                    iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission

                                    of the Court;

                                    iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution

                                    witness;

                                    10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned

                                    shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

                                    11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively

                                    for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be

                                    considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                                                      (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
                                    October 1, 2026
                                    Sachin




Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad