Disposed¶11

Seema Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Apr 2025NABAIL/1342/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC 2025 anticipatory bail disposed as not pressed; applicant Seema Devi; case crime 83/2012, Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B IPC, P.S. Baidpura, District Etawah; liberty to seek regular bail; expeditious decision in view of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922; interim bar on coercive steps for two weeks or till surrender, whichever earlier; S.482 BNSS application; Justice Deepak Verma; neutral citation 2025:AHC:46184.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application disposed of as not pressed; applicant given liberty to apply for regular bail (to be decided expeditiously in terms of Satender Kumar Antil if made within two weeks), together with interim immunity from coercive action for two weeks or until surrender before the court below, whichever is earlier. ¶11

Seema Devi Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in Case Crime No.83 of 2012 (Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Baidpura, District Etawah) during pendency of trial.

¶7

Court's answer

At the instance of counsel for the applicant (with no objection from the A.G.A.), the anticipatory bail application was to be dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to file a regular bail application.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

If the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks from the date of the order and applies for regular bail, the application shall be decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra).

¶9

Key takeaways

Interim protection was extended: for the period of two weeks from the date of the order, or till the applicant surrenders before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against her.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 67) — Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 1342 of 2025 (Deepak Verma, J.; Order dated 3.4.2025): Applicant Seema Devi, accused in Case Crime No. 83 of 2012 under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Baidpura, District Etawah, sought anticipatory bail during pendency of trial. On counsel's submission, concurred in by the A.G.A., the application was disposed of as not pressed with liberty to file a regular bail application. The Court directed that if the applicant appears before the trial court within two weeks and applies for regular bail, it shall be decided expeditiously in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. Interim protection granted: no coercive action against the applicant for two weeks or till surrender before the court below, whichever is earlier.

Seema Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Devi 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases