Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 161218 (ALL)

PUSHPA DEVI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/1181/2025 · 2025-09-10

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1181 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Alok Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Smt. Kamlesh Kumari, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.241 of 2025, under Sections 191(2)/115(2)/352/351(2)/109 B.N.S., registered at Police Station Mailani, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.06.2025 against six persons including the applicants stating that because of an old animosity all the accused persons had assaulted the informant's wife and daughter causing serious injuries to them. 4. The CT examination of one of the injured woman mentions a fracture on right frontal bone. In the statement of injured Vimla Devi she stated that all the accused persons had assaulted her and her daughter was taken to Community Health Centre, Gola from where she was referred to District Hospital, Lakhimpur Kheri and she had to remain admitted in a hospital for four days. 5. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of allegations and the injuries Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pushpa Devi And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) suffered by two women in the present case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts do not warrant exercise of discretion of this court by granting pre-arrest bail to the applicants. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. However, in case the applicants appear before the learned trial court and seek their release on regular bail, their bail applications shall be considered in accordance with law without being influenced by rejection of their anticipatory bail application by this court. September 10, 2025 Ram. NABAIL No. 1181 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench