Guddi @ Husna Bano vs State of U.P.

Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.194 of 2025, under Sections 85, 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Utraon, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is the sisterin-law (Jethani) of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence as she lives separately to the husband-wife duo. A false averment has been made by the daughter of deceased that the deceased was strangulated by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The post-mortem report does not support the said allegations.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.09.2025 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could

¶14

BAIL No. 40811 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

¶17

The Supreme Court in the judgment of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. The State of Bihar, (2022) 6 SCC 599 has categorically opined that the Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that the applicant is the sister-in-law (Jethani) of the deceased and the fact that the post-mortem report does not support the prosecution story, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Guddi @ Husna Bano , 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.

¶20

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

¶26

November 19, 2025 (Ravi Kant)

¶27

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

Guddi @ Husna Bano v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddi @ Husna Bano 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash vs State of U.P.

Vikas vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jogendra Alias Jugnu vs State of U.P.

Mustaq Ali @ Goonga @ Baura vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Abhay Kumar Malik Alias Vishal vs State of U.P.