Allahabad High Court

GIRIJA DEVI AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail, holding that in the absence of specific allegations and given the cross‑cases, false implication could not be ruled out and custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

Summary

The applicants filed an anticipatory bail application under CrPC Section 482 in a case where they were named among eight accused for alleged assault. They claimed false implication, noting that they had not been arrested, had no criminal antecedents, and that cross‑cases existed with injuries on both sides. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the lack of prior convictions. The Court observed that no specific allegations were made against the applicants, the charge sheet had been filed, and custodial interrogation was no longer required, making false implication plausible. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, emphasizing that the order was limited to this application and not an opinion on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the applicants are allegedly falsely implicated and no specific role is assigned in the FIR.
Whether the existence of cross‑cases and the filing of a charge sheet negate the need for custodial interrogation, justifying bail.
Whether conditions imposed under Section 482 of the CrPC are appropriate in the present circumstances.

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 110, 115(2), 117, 125, 191(2), 324(4), 333, 351(2), 352
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482

Subjects

anticipatory bail
false implication
cross case
senior citizen
woman
no criminal antecedents
Section 482 CrPC
conditions of bail

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9827 of 2026

Girija Devi And 2 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : M.J. Akhtar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard the Learned counsel for the applicants and the Learned A.G.A.
for the State as well as perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicants in Case Crime No. 275 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 191(2),
352, 351(2), 333, 125, 117, 110 and 324(4) of BNS, Police Station-
Ramkola, District Kushinagar, with a prayer to enlarge them on
anticipatory bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the
abovementioned case.

3. The Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the
applicants have been falsely implicated in the FIR along with five other
named accused. The allegation against all the accused persons is that they
assaulted the four injured persons. The applicants were not arrested
during investigation and now once the charge sheet has been filed, they
are no longer required for any custodial interrogation or recovery. The
Learned counsel for the applicants has further contended that there is a
cross version and six persons from the applicant's side have also received
injuries. The cross case has been registered as Case Crime No. 433 of
2025. The Learned counsel for the applicants has also contended that
applicant no. 1 is a lady and applicant no. 2 is an old man aged about 65
years. Applicants are having no criminal antecedents and they may be
considered for grant of anticipatory bail.
NABAIL No. 9827 of 2026
2

4. The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but does not dispute
the fact that the applicants have no criminal antecedents.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.

6. There are cross cases and both sides claim to have sustained injuries.
The applicant no. 1 is a lady, applicant no. 2 is said to be a senior citizen
and the applicant no. 3 is the husband of applicant no. 1. No specific
allegations have been made against the applicants. The FIR has been
lodged on general allegations against eight named accused persons. In the
prima facie opinion of the Court, taking note of the fact that there are
cross cases and no specific role has been assigned to the applicants, false
implication of the applicants cannot be ruled out. Charge sheet has
already been submitted and the applicants are no longer required for any
custodial interrogation.

7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicants on anticipatory bail.

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

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicants- Girija, Ramdhani and
Madan, they shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on
anticipatory bail on furnishing of their personal bond and surety 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
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;
NABAIL No. 9827 of 2026
3

iv. that the applicants 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.)
September 29, 2026
Junaid

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…