Khusboo Yadav vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145871

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29065 of 2025

Applicant :- Khusboo Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Murli Dhar Yadav,Sapan Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Sapan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 277 of 2025, under Sections 105 of BNS, Police Station Saraikhwaja, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the wife of the deceased person, is stated to have shown the case to be of suicide as had shouted and told the family members that he had committed suicide in the night of 01/02.05.2025.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by 13 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶11

Learned counsel has next stated that the informant was present at the time of inquest proceedings and there was no allegation or even sniffing to be the case of homicide, as such the applicant who happens to be wife of the deceased person, is entitled for bail. The complete story has subsequently been concocted just to deprive her rights of inheritance. The cause of death was found to be ante mortem head injury.

¶12

There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.05.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not

¶13

misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR coupled by the fact that the informant was present at the time of inquest proceedings, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Khusboo Yadav , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶17

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 23.8.2025 Sumit S

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Khusboo Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khusboo Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pappu @ Deshpal vs State of U.P.

Rohit vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh and Another vs State of U.P.

Bhuri Singh vs State of U.P.

Ramesh vs State of U.P.

Sitaram vs State of U.P.