Allowed¶29

Smt Hema @ Prem Lata v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2025NABAIL/8682/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS; BNS Sections 87, 69, 352, 351(3), 115(2); forced marriage, adducement/kidnapping, criminal intimidation, theft of jewellery; victim statements under Sections 180/183 BNSS; charge-sheet not filed; Sushila Aggarwal (2020) 5 SCC 1; Siddharth (2022) 1 SCC 676; personal bond Rs.50,000 with two sureties; bail till police report under Section 193 BNSS; Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.; decided 17 November 2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to the applicant till filing of the police report under Section 193 of BNSS before the Competent Court; in the event of arrest, release on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, subject to the stated conditions. ¶29

Smt Hema @ Prem Lata vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant Smt. Hema @ Prem Lata, named accused in Case Crime No.43 of 2025 under Sections 87, 69, 352, 351(3), 115(2) of BNS, P.S. Sakrauli, District Etah.

¶12

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till filing of the police report under Section 193 of BNSS before the Competent Court.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶29

Key takeaways

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, subject to conditions (availability for interrogation, no inducement/threat/promise, no leaving India without permission and passport deposit); on default of any condition the Investigating Officer may apply for cancellation of the protection.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — granted. Applicant, a lady named accused (with main accused Shivam) in Case Crime No.43 of 2025 under Sections 87, 69, 352, 351(3), 115(2) of BNS, P.S. Sakrauli, District Etah, alleged to have taken the victim by adducement for a forced marriage, retention of her jewellery and criminal intimidation. Investigation ongoing, charge-sheet not filed, applicant cooperating with the I.O.; marriage agreement executed on notorial stamp paper nowhere recorded that the victim was cheated or threatened by the applicant; victim a major. Relying on Sushila Aggarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 1 and Siddharth, (2022) 1 SCC 676, and without expressing opinion on merits, the Court held it a fit case for anticipatory bail till filing of the police report under Section 193 of BNSS, on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, with usual conditions and liberty to the I.O. to seek cancellation on default.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8682 of 2025

¶3

Smt Hema @ Prem Lata

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P.

¶7

.....Opposite

¶8

Party(s)

¶9

Counsel for Applicant(s):Raghubir Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s):G.A.

¶10

Court No. - 71

¶11

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶12

1. This application has been moved on behalf of the
applicant - Smt. Hema @ Prem Lata seeking anticipatory
bail in Case Crime No.43 of 2025, under Sections 87, 69,
352, 351(3), 115(2) of BNS, P.S.Sakrauli, District Etah.

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶14

3. It is alleged in the FIR of this case that the named
accused persons Shivam and his relative Smt. Hema,
present applicant, came to the house of the informant and
by way of adducement they took the victim of this case
with them where forced marriage was performed by them
with the victim and main accused Shivam made physical
relations with her many times and also took her to the

¶15

Court and prepared some papers relating to the marriage.
Subsequently when the informant made a search for her
daughter she was returned by the accused persons. Her
jewels were also kept by the accused persons and they
threatened her for life. F.I.R. was lodged and
investigation is going on.

¶16

4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicant that applicant is innocent and she has
apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case,
whereas there is no credible evidence against her.
Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It
is also submitted that no fraud has been played by the
present applicant and main accused Shivam with the

¶17

NABAIL No. 8682 of 2025

¶18

¶19

victim. They performed marriage in a Mandir and a write-
up was also prepared in the form of marriage agreement on
the notorial stamp paper. Applicant is a lady and no
offence under Section 69 of BNS is made out against her.
It is also submitted that after six months of the
incident complaints were made by the victim of this case.
Medical report does not corroborate the prosecution
version. There are material contradictions in the
statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and
183 of BNSS. The investigation of the case is going-on
and charge-sheet has not been filed. It has been
submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory
bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will
co-operate in the investigation and would obey all
conditions of bail.

¶20

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory
bail and submitted that the present applicant was fully
involved in commission of the alleged crime alongwith the
main accused Shivam.

¶21

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

7. It appears that investigation in the matter is going
on and the applicant is cooperating with the I.O. of the
case. It also appears that the marriage agreement was
executed on a notorial stamp paper wherein nowhere it was
mentioned by the victim that she has been cheated or
threatened by the present applicant. Victim is a major
lady.

¶23

8. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of
Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex
Court has held that while considering an application for
grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the
nature of the offence, the role of the person, the
likelihood of his influencing the course of
investigation, or tampering with evidence including
intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice,
such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been
held that Courts ought to be generally guided by
considerations such as the nature and gravity of the
offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the

¶24

NABAIL No. 8682 of 2025

¶25

¶26

facts of the case, while considering whether to grant
anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not
is a matter of discretion.

¶27

9. In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another,
(2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court
has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of
our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an
accused during investigation arises when custodial
investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime
or where there is a possibility of influencing the
witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an
arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate
that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made
between the existence of the power to arrest and the
justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made
routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation
and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer
has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or
disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated
with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on
the officer to arrest the accused.

¶28

10. Considering the settled principles of law regarding
anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of
applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of
the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory
bail to the applicant till filing of police report under
Section 193 of BNSS before the Competent Court.

¶29

11. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶30

12. In the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall
be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a
personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House
Officer of the police station concerned with the
following conditions:-

¶31

(i) The applicant shall make herself available for
interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶32

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make

¶33

¶34

NABAIL No. 8682 of 2025

¶35

any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police office.

¶36

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the
previous permission of the Court and if she has passport,
the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P.
Concerned.

¶37

13. In case of default of any of the conditions, the
Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file
appropriate application for cancellation of protection
granted to the applicant.

¶38

November 17, 2025
safi

¶39

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶40

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Hema @ Prem Lata v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Hema @ Prem Lata 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

Akeel Mohammad and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Kaptan Alias Kaptan Singh Alias Sukhdev vs State of U.P.

Smt. Babli vs State of U.P. and Another

Sumit vs State of U.P.

Akash Kumar vs State of U.P.

Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Patel vs State of U.P.