HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34745 of 2025 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Smt Rooma Devi with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No.430 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Gandhi Park, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is not actually the beneficiary of the so called forged transaction. The husband of the applicant was died on 25.01.2022. It is further submitted that insurance policy was issued after the death of the husband of the applicant on 17.02.2022 and 26.02.2022. It is further submitted that this was happened due to some mistake regarding the date of death of the husband of the applicant. She has not received any financial gain from the insurance company or any other person. It is further submitted that the agent of the insurance company is the main person, who has already been expelled from his job by the concerned company. The applicant is a lady. She is languishing in jail since 26.08.2025 having no criminal history. It is submitted that since the charge-sheet has already been submitted, therefore, there is no reasonable possibility of intimidating or pressurizing the prosecution witnesses and there is no likelihood of her fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but he could not dispute the above facts. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vashishtha Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Smt Rooma Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed. 6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against her in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. BAIL No. 34745 of 2025 2 7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 8. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. (Santosh Rai,J.) October 9, 2025 Radhika BAIL No. 34745 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad