Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12458 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 158 of 2025 Applicant :- Nadiya Khaja Shaikh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Salman,Ana Fatma,Mukhtar Ahamad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Salman, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri S.M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the complainant/ informant and filed Vakalatnama on her behalf. The same is taken on record. 2. Mr. Mohd. Salman has filed supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record. 3. Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate has submitted instructions letter dated 28.02.2025 addressing to the Government Advocate, Lucknow being provided by Sri Shivam Kumar, Sub-Inspector, Police Station- Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow along with instructions and General Diary details dated 02.01.2025 and 03.01.2025, the same are taken on record. 4. This has been admitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that presently the applicant is residing at Mumbai and she was granted transit remand by the Railway Court concerned at Mumbai, which has been expired on 03.01.2025. Thereafter, such transit remand was not extended and considering her medical condition she was in a deemed custody till 03.01.2025. She gave birth of a child on 29.01.2025, as Birth Certificate of the child is annexed as Annexure No.SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed today. Presently her medical condition is not proper. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has informed that the charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant and other co-accused persons on 04.01.2025. 6. Keeping in view that the Railway Court at Mumbai granted transit remand to the present applicant and such remand has not been extended and presently the accused applicant is at Mumbai, therefore, any appropriate application could have been filed before the competent court at Mumbai either by the applicant or by the prosecution. Besides, the charge-sheet has been filed so I do not find any eminent apprehension of arrest of the present applicant. 7. Therefore, this anticipatory bail application is rejected at this stage. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench