Sudha Mudalya and 3 Others vs State of U.P.

The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicants Sudha Mudalya, Manju Swami, Shanta Swami, Munni Verma , with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 184 of 2025, under Section 3(1) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, registered at Police Station Dashashwamedh, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial.

¶11

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. Four cases of criminal history of applicant Nos. 1 and 2 and three cases of criminal history of applicant Nos. 3 and 4 have sufficiently been explained.

¶12

It is further submitted that the applicants are not a member or leader or organizer of a gang and they have not abetted or assisted in the activities of a gang as enumerated in clause (b) of Section 2 of the Act. Applicants have no criminal history except the aforesaid case. It is next submitted that there is

¶13

BAIL No. 37191 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicants, who are languishing in jail since15.9.2025, undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶16

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but has not pointed out any other case against the applicants except the cases shown by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶17

Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and also taking into consideration the provision of Section 19(4) of the Act and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let applicants, Sudha Mudalya, Manju Swami, Shanta Swami, Munni Verma , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-

¶19

(i) The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(ii) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶21

(iii) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S.

¶22

(iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶23

(v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel.

¶24

BAIL No. 37191 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

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

¶27

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶28

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶29

November 6, 2025 Ravi Prakash

¶30

Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudha Mudalya and 3 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudha Mudalya and 3 Others 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

Similar cases

Ayush Shukla Alias Rishab Shukla vs State of U.P.

Muzammil Alias Sagar vs State of U.P.

Nanhe Paswan vs State of U.P.

Sajid vs State of U.P.

Charan Singh vs State of U.P.

Abid vs State of U.P.