HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8370 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record. This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 482 BNSS has been moved by the applicant after rejecting her anticipatory bail application by the order dated 23.09.2025 passed by Incharge Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar, seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 03 of 2024, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station G.R.P., District Bulandshahar, during the pendency of the investigation. As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant Shambhudutt Sharma, got an F.I.R. lodged on 28.04.2024 for the offence under Section 306 IPC against Sushil, Smt. Anita and Vibhor making allegation inter alia that his elder brother Vishan Chandra Sharma and his wife Harwati Devi (sister-in-law of the complainant) died after being hit by train leaving behind suicide note, wherein name of Sushil, Smt. Anita and Vibhor is mentioned. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the prosecution case, two suicide notes were recovered by the Investigating Officer. There is no allegation against the applicant in the first suicide note. The applicant is also not named in the F.I.R. The applicant is daughter of the deceased and in second suicide Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vandana Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) note, there is allegation against her that she has forcibly taken Rs. 2.5 lacs from the deceased. Much emphasis has been given by contending that alleged suicide notes are forged and fabricated documents. The genuineness of both the suicide notes are still to be ascertained by the Forensic Science Laboratory, Ghaziabad. On account of property dispute, the applicant has been falsely implicated by the complainant, who is her uncle. It is also pointed out that co- accused Vibhor, Sushil Kumar Sharma and Anita, who are named in the F.I.R., have been granted bail anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.01.2025, 10.02.2025 and 17.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 CrPC No. 10094 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 482 BNSS Nos. 1001 of 2025 and 963 of 2025. The applicant has no criminal history to her credit. She has apprehension of imminent arrest. Lastly, it is submitted that in case, the applicant is released on bail, she would not misuse the liberty and would cooperate with the investigation, which is still pending against her. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. has opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant but could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I find that case of present applicant Vandana Sharma stands on better footing than that of co-accused Vibhor, Sushil Kumar Sharma and Anita, who are named in the F.I.R. and have been granted anticipatory bail as noted above. Looking to the facts of the case, reasonable apprehension of arrest, taking into consideration the gravity and nature of accusation and there being no possibility of her fleeing from justice, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case. In the event of arrest of the applicant Vandana Sharma involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the NABAIL No. 8370 of 2025 2 police station concerned till the submission of police report, if any, under section 193(3) BNSS with the following conditions :- 1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 3) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. 4) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above or in case it is found that applicant has obtained this order concealing any material facts , the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. It is clarified that anything said in this order at this stage is limited to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. With the aforesaid directions, this anticipatory bail application is allowed. October 14, 2025 Shubham NABAIL No. 8370 of 2025 3 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad