INDRAWATI RAI @ NEETU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/268/2024 · 2025-09-16
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 170679 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 170679 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
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. - 268 of 2024 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
1. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Abhay Kumar Singh, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0701 of 2024, under Sections 3(1)of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Barabanki. 3. The gang chart mentions involvement of the applicant is a solitary case, in which the applicant's arrest was stayed by means of an order dated 06.02.2024, passed by this court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.859 of 2024. After the charge sheet was filed against the applicant she has filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.857 of 2025 and by means of an order dated 06.02.2025 the proceedings of base case mentioned in the gang chart has been stayed against the applicant. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail-application it has been contended that the applicant is an innocent woman, she has no criminal history other than the solitary case mentioned in the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar Pandey, Avinash Mishra, Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Indrawati Rai @ Neetu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
gang chart and she has falsely been implicated in the present case. 5. It has also been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is neither a leader nor member of any gang. 6. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter. 7. Prima facie it appears that the applicant has been implicated in the present case merely because he has a criminal history. There appears to be no reasonable ground for prima facie believing that the applicant is guilty of the offence alleged. 8. The minimum punishment which can be imposed in case of the applicant's conviction is imprisonment for two years. 9.
There is nothing on record which may give rise to a reasonable apprehension that the applicant may tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses or that the applicant will abscond and will not face the trial or that he is likely to commit any other offence in case he is released on bail. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. 11. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant- Indrawati Rai @ Neetu Rai before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any NABAIL No. 268 of 2024 2
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court' (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. September 16, 2025 Ram. NABAIL No. 268 of 2024 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench