RAMDEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 3945 of 2026

Ramdevi
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)               :   Shiv Babu Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)          :   G.A., Nanhe Lal Tripathi

Court No. - 70
                 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the
informant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the
record.

2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant seeking
anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 32 of 2026 under Sections 85, 80(2)
BNS & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Banpur, District Lalitpur.


3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that
applicant is innocent and on the basis of false allegation, she has been
made accused in the present matter. He further submits that applicant is
mother-in-law of the deceased and no specific allegation is against her.
He further submits that panchayatnama of the deceased was conducted on
the information given by father-in-law, one of the co-accused. He next
submits that during panchayatnama and post-mortem, no any ante-
mortem injury was found. It is also contended that seven months' old
child of the deceased is under the care and custody of the applicant. It is
also contended that during post-mortem, cause of death was not
ascertained and viscera was preserved and in the viscera report,
Aluminium Phosphide was found. It is next submitted that applicant is
having apprehension of arrest by the police any time in the above-
mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. If the
applicant is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty and will
                                                        NABAIL No. 3945 of 2026
                                 2


cooperate with the trial.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant
opposed the anticipatory bail.

5. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another,
(2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject
finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration
invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

6. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can,
depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after
filing of the charge sheet till trial.

7. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while
considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to
consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of
his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence
including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as
leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be
generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the
offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case,
while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether
to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

8. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail,
nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant
till the trial.

9. The application is allowed accordingly.

10. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Ramdevi, she shall be released
on anticipatory bail till the end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall make himself/herself available before the
                                                                                         NABAIL No. 3945 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    Investigating Officer/Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and
                                    will cooperate in the investigation/trial.

                                    (ii) 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
                                    police office.

                                    (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of
                                    the Court and if he/she has passport, the same shall be deposited by
                                    him/her before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

                                    11. In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground
                                    for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.



                                                                                       (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    KK Patel




Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad