Aneeta Yadav vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15009 of 2026

Aneeta Yadav

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Brij Lal Shukla, Pawan Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 67

¶6

HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 29 of 2026, under Sections 103(2), 109(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 333, 131, 352 BNS, Police Station- Tarkulwa, District Deoria.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per prosecution story, all the accused persons as well as family of the deceased are near relatives and over a dispute of land, quarrel took place and co-accused Babulal has hit the injured Narsingh Yadav with hoe (kudal). When he tried to repeat the blow, then the deceased tried to rescue him and co-accused Babulal hit the deceased which resulted into her death. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the injured Narsingh Yadav made specific allegation against co-accused Babulal for causing grievous injuries to him as well as deceased and on his pointing out a hoe (kudal) was recovered. The applicant has been falsely implicated though there is no specific allegation against her. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and being a lady, she is entitled to be released on bail in view of Section 480 BNSS. She is languishing in jail since 07.02.2026. In case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial

¶10

BAIL No. 15009 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

proceedings.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that the applicant is lady and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari vs State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant- Aneeta Yadav involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶16

i. The applicant 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

¶20

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

¶21

BAIL No. 15009 of 2026

¶22

3

¶23

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

Verification of mobile number as well as Aadhar Card of the applicant and sureties should also be conducted by the court concerned.

¶25

It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.

¶26

It is directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant.

¶27

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Deoria Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 .

¶28

(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)

¶29

May 5, 2026 A.Kr.

¶30

Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aneeta Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aneeta 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hariom Vs State of U.P.

Dhara Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dilip Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Anis Vs State of U.P.

Manohar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Zakir vs State of U.P.