SMT RAJNI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 9410 of 2026

Smt Rajni And Another
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others
                                                               .....Opposite
                                                                     Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                :   Rajeev Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)           :   G.A., Udaybhan Shukla

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

1. Heard Sri Babu Lal holding the brief of Sri Rajeev Kumar Sharma,
Learned counsel for the applicants, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and
Sri Rajnish Kumar Srivastava holding the brief of Sri Udaybhan Shukla,
Learned counsel for informant and perused the record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicants in Case Crime No. 58 of 2026, under Sections 191(2), 191(3),
190, 352, 551(2), 117(2), 109 BNS, Police Station- Kakod, District -
Bulandshahar, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the
applicants apprehend their arrest in the above-mentioned case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the applicants are
ladies and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. The
applicants have been shown to be armed with sticks and participated with
the co-accused Surjeet, who is the husband of applicant no. 1, and
Harendra Kumar, who is husband of applicant no. 2, along with three
unknown persons for assaulting the injured. He further contends that the
injured Raj Kumar has received five injuries and the injured Shiv Kumar
has received seven injuries. The injuries of the injured Shiv Kumar and
Raj Kumar have not been opined to be dangerous to life. He further
submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. There
are cross versions and the husband of the applicant no. 2 is also an
injured. The husband of the applicant no. 1 is the village Pradhan and it is
due to political enmity that the applicants have been falsely implicated in
the present case. The applicants have no criminal antecedents.
                                                     NABAIL No. 9410 of 2026
                               2

4. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail and contended that the co-accused, Harendra Kumar had
applied for anticipatory bail before this Court and this Court has been
pleased to reject his anticipatory bail. The case of the applicants stand on
a similar footing to that of the co-accused, Harendra Kumar and they may
not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned A.G.A. has also adopted the submissions made by learned
counsel for the informant.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the
parties and perused the material brought on the record.
7. There are cross cases. The applicants are ladies having no criminal
antecedents. The husband of the applicant no. 1 is a village Pradhan and
in the prima facie opinion of the Court, false implication of the applicants
due to political enmity cannot be ruled out. It is an admitted case of the
prosecution that the injured Ram Kumar was complaining against the
village Pradhan and had also moved some applications under Right to
Information Act. No specific role has been assigned to the applicants. The
applicants, being ladies, their case stands on a different footing from that
of the co-accused, Harendra Kumar, whose anticipatory bail has been
rejected.

8. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to
enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.

9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants
is allowed.
10. In the event of the arrest of the applicants- Smt. Rajni and Smt. Anu
@ Kamlesh, they 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 following conditions:-
i. the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a
police officer as and when required;
ii. that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of
                                                                                        NABAIL No. 9410 of 2026
                                                                  3

                                    the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or
                                    to any police officer;
                                    iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous
                                    permission of the Court;
                                    iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
                                    witness;
                                    11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
                                    shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
                                    12. 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.)
                                    September 11, 2026
                                    Sartaj




Digitally signed by :-
SARTAJ AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad