SHAILENDRI DEVI ( SALENDRI IN F.I.R) v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/278/2025 · 2025-04-02
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 130251 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 130251 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18494 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 278 of 2025 Applicant :- Shailendri Devi ( Salendri In F.I.R) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshmana Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State-opposite party No.1 and perused the record. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with.
2. The instant second application for anticipatory bail has been moved by the applicant- Shailendri Devi, in Case Crime/F.I.R. No.014 of 2025, under Sections 190(1), 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 333, 351(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station- Sharda Nagar, District- Kheri, with the prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail, as she is apprehending arrest in the above- mentioned case. The first anticipatory bail application of the applicant bearing Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 482 BNSS No.234 of 2025 having been dismissed with liberty to file a fresh by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 11.03.2025. 3. As per contents of First Information Report, the applicant along with co-accused is said to have an altercation with the family members of informant and inflicted serious injuries upon him. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against her and that even otherwise as per contains of F.I.R., only general role has been assigned to the applicant without any specific indication of any particular weapon. It is submitted that the injury report does not corroborate allegations levelled against the applicant, who does not have any previous criminal history. 5. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposed anticipatory bail application with the submission that injury report clearly corroborates allegations levelled against the applicant. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that as per contents of F.I.R., general role has been assigned to all the accused of inflicting injuries upon family members of informant; there however appears to contradiction in the statements of informant Balter @ Bulkuter with the injured Sunita with regard to role of applicant and the weapon which was in her possession; such an aspect would be required to be clarified during course of investigation; the applicant does not appear to have any previous criminal history. 7. Thus, having regard to the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Nathu Singh v. State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021, protection from arrest for limited period of time i.e. till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., may be granted in favour of the applicants. 8. In result, the anticipatory bail application moved by applicant- Shailendri Devi is finally disposed of with a direction that till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., in the event of arrest of applicant in above- mentioned case, she shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.
50,000/- and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation or even for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (2) The applicant 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court.
9. In case of default of any condition, the investigating officer may approach this Court for cancellation/modification of this
order.
Order Date :- 2.4.2025 Shubhankar Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench