Allahabad High Court
SMT BALA @ RAJ BALAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail and allowed the application.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC filed by Smt Bala, a 76‑year‑old woman, who was alleged to be involved in offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The FIR was lodged thirty‑one years after the alleged incident and after a belated application under Section 173(4) of the CrPC, leading the applicant to claim false implication. The applicant asserted she had cooperated with the investigation and was prepared to continue doing so, while the State opposed the bail but could not refute her contentions. After evaluating the delay, the nature of the allegations and the applicant’s willingness to cooperate, the Court, without passing on the merits, found a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to standard conditions, including cooperation with the investigation, non‑tampering with evidence, and restriction on leaving India without permission.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC despite the long delay in filing the FIR.
- Whether the delay and alleged false implication justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 173(4), 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- Section 173(4) CrPC
- IPC offences
- delay in FIR
- false implication
- senior citizen
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 8994 of 2026
Smt Bala @ Raj Bala
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajnish Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
(Sl. No. 76 out of 76)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rajnish Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A.K.
Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.22 of 2026, registered under Sections 420, 467,
468, 471 IPC, at Police Station- Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar, with a
prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant, who is a 76
years old lady, has nothing to do with the said offence and has been falsely
implicated in the present case. The FIR was instituted after a delay of thirty-
one years, that too, after moving an application u/s 173(4) BNSS, as an
afterthought. The will deed, if any, is stated to have been executed on
14.2.1985. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest. She has cooperated
in the investigation and is ready to do so during the trial also, failing which
the State may move an appropriate application for cancellation of
anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail
application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned
counsel for the applicant.
NABAIL No. 8994 of 2026
2
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking
into consideration the delay in lodging of FIR and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie the Court is of the view that
the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the
anticipatory bail application is allowed.
7. Let the accused-applicant, Smt Bala @ Raj Bala, be released on
anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the conclusion of the trial on
furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each to the satisfaction of the
court concerned, subject to the conditions that she shall cooperate with the
investigation and trial, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any
witness, shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial court, and
in case of breach of any of these conditions, the court concerned shall be at
liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail.
8. The observations made herein are confined to the disposal of the present
anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the merits of the trial.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
September 11, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…