Poonam Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4134 of 2025

Poonam Pal

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Ashutosh Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	Ashok Kumar Singh, G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 68

¶6

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

Heard Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Ashutosh Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondents and Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant. Perused the record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 24 of 2023, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Soraon, District Commissionerate, Prayagraj during the pendency of the trial before the Court below.

¶9

The bail application of the applicant before the court below was rejected by learned learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Allahabad vide order dated 10.01.2024 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.02.2023.

¶10

Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant vehemently argued that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number for ulterior motives. The F.I.R. has been lodged after an inordinate and unexplained delay of two years nominating the applicant and one Banshidhar Singh with the allegation interalia that the applicant executed a sale deed of a Plot No. B-29 situated in Gata No. 416 admeasuring 92.94 sq. meters even though the applicant was not the owner thereof. When the informant asked co-accused Banshidhar Singh to settle the dispute, he handed over a cheque bearing no.

¶11

BAIL No. 4134 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

158108 of IDBI Bank of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Seven Lakh), which was dishonored. The sale deed was got executed by the applicant in the capacity of Director of Obedient Infra Development Pvt. Ltd. It is argued that the applicant had earlier purchased a land admeasuring 0.1140 Hectares in Gata No. 416 from one Gyanendra Singh POA of Khushnawati Devi w/o Mahesh Pratap and further negotiations were underway to purchase further land. It is further argued that the applicant has not cheated the informant nor dishonestly induced him to deliver any property to him. The applicant has not done any act of forgery of valuable security and the ingredients of sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. are not attracted. The present dispute is purely civil in nature and has been given the colour of criminality. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 31 of the bail application. The applicant undertakes to co-operate with the trial and is not a flight risk. She undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail if enlarged on bail. It is further submitted that charge-sheet against the applicant has already been filed and further custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. The applicant is also entitled to the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S. being a lady. Hence, bail is prayed for.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail plea by submitting that the complicity of the applicant is established from the material collected by the I.O. during the investigation. It is also argued that the applicant has a large history of criminal cases to her credit. However, they contended they could not controvert the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Having heard the respective counsels for the parties and having perused the records, I find that a case for bail is made out.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the accused-applicant, Poonam Pal, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail , on her executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶18

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶19

BAIL No. 4134 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶22

3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and cooperate in the trial.

¶23

4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless her personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶24

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel her bail.

¶25

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶26

March 31, 2026

¶27

Vibha Singh

¶28

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Poonam Pal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Poonam Pal v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Afsar vs State of U.P.

Atul Kumar vs State of U.P.

Smt Gayatri Devi vs State of U.P.

Savej vs State of U.P.

Vinay Shankar Lal Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Patel vs State of U.P.