Tanu Vs State of U.P.

The instant bail application on behalf of the applicant Tanu seeks enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 471 of 2025, under Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 318(4) of BNS, Police Station Kakar, District Bulandshahar, during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant before the court below was rejected by the Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar, vide order dated 09.02.2026 and the applicant is stated to be languishing in jail since 23.01.2026.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant before addressing the court on merits of the case has invited the attention if this Court to the orders dated 13.03.2026 and 13.04.2026 of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The order dated 13.03.2026 required the learned AGA to obtain instructions regarding status of investigation as well as the material against the applicant collected during the investigation. The order dated 13.04.2026 in the absence of the requisite information called for required the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahar to appear before the Court and explain his conduct for not complying with the order of the Court dated 13.03.2026 despite receiving information on 18.03.2026 through e-Mail from the office of the Government Advocate.

¶11

Pursuant to the order dated 13.04.2026, a personal affidavit of Sri Dinesh

¶12

BAIL No. 8641 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

Kumar Singh the present Senior Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahar has been filed in compliance thereof which is taken on record. Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Senior Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahar is also present in Court and his presence is duly acknowledged by the Court.

¶15

The Court has gone through the personal affidavit of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahar and is satisfied by the explanation offered for not being in a position to comply with the directions contained in the order dated 13.03.2036. The unconditional apology tendered is accepted and the personal presence of the Officer on future dates is exempted.

¶16

Learned AGA has filed compliance affidavit which is taken on record.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this case crime number. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and her name surfaced in the statement of co-accused. He submits that one of the accused Pawan Bhati in his statement has stated that the applicant was an employee in the Office of Vivek Sharma. He submits that Pawan Bhati and Vivek Sharma prepared a forged document in the name of Tanu as Tanu Enterprises to register a forged firm. He submits that Pawan Bhati and Vivek Sharma are the main accused of the alleged forgery and the applicant has no connection in the aforesaid crime. He submits that no amount has been credited in the bank account of the applicant as such she is not the beneficiary of the aforesaid crime. He submits that no incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. He submits that the applicant is a student of B.A. IIIrd Year and she was an employee in the Office of Vivek Sharma and was working as Compute Operator. He submits that Vivek Sharma misused her Aadhar Card and other documents to register a forged document. He submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.01.2026. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to her credit He submits that there is no likelihood of her fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, the bail has been prayed for.

¶18

BAIL No. 8641 of 2026

¶19

3

¶20

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail, but could not dispute the above submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶21

Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and primafacie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶23

Let the accused-applicant, Tanu , 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:

¶24

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶25

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶26

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶27

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.

¶28

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

¶29

April 21, 2026

¶30

pks

¶31

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶32

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

Tanu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanu 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saud Alias Hatela Vs State of U.P.

Durga Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Sudhanshu Chauhan @ S.K. Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manjeet Singh vs State of U.P.

Farhat Rafiq Vs State of U.P.

Abran @ Bingo Khan and Another vs State of U.P.