Suman @ Preeti vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2026)

Suman @ Preeti vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appellant released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned; trial court directed to accept the bonds and release her forthwith without insisting on prior verification of surety bonds, with liberty to the trial court to take appropriate action in case of default.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, who had been granted interim bail on 16.04.2026 but failed to appear on the date fixed resulting in issuance of a non-bailable warrant dated 11.05.2026, could be enlarged on bail in the present appeal, given her undertaking to appear before the trial court on each and every date fixed and cooperate in the proceedings, to which learned State Counsel raised no objection. +1 more

Court's answer

The appeal is disposed of with a direction that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- along with one surety of the like amount, the Court being guided by the fact that the appellant is a lady, the provisions of Section 437 Cr.P.C., the interest of justice, and the judgment in Bacchi Devi Vs. State of UP and Another (2025 SCC OnLine AII 5286).

Ratio / Principle

The trial court shall accept the personal bond and surety furnished by the appellant and release her forthwith without insisting upon prior verification of the surety bonds; the verification process may be undertaken subsequently in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

It is made clear that in case the appellant fails to appear before the trial court on any date fixed without sufficient cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.ratio¶¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Praveen Kumar Giri, J.; decision dated June 10, 2026) disposed of Criminal Appeal No. 1558 of 2026 filed by Suman @ Preeti challenging the order/judgment dated 11-05-2026 of the Special Sessions Judge (S.C./S.T. Act.), Raebareli, in Bail Application No. 1132 of 2026 (arising out of Crime No. 139/2024, Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(Da, Dha) S.C./S.T. Act), whereby a non-bailable warrant was issued against her for non-appearance despite interim bail granted on 16.04.2026. Counsel for the appellant did not press the appeal on merits (including his contention that the SC/ST Act provisions were not attracted); the appellant undertook to appear and cooperate before the trial court, and learned State Counsel raised no objection to her release. The Court directed release on bail on a personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, having regard to the appellant being a lady, the provisions of Section 437 Cr.P.C., the interest of justice and the judgment in Bacchi Devi Vs. State of UP and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine AII 5286; the trial court was directed to accept the bonds and release her forthwith without insisting on prior verification of surety bonds (verification to follow in accordance with law), with liberty to pass appropriate orders if she defaulted in appearance. No finding was recorded on the merits or on the applicability of the SC/ST Act.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1558 of 2026

Suman @ Preeti

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Sushilendra Kumar Sahu
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 13

HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned AGA for the State.

The present appeal has been filed with the prayer to quash the order/ judgment dated 11-05-2026 passed by Court of Special Session Judge (S.C./ S.T. Act.) Raebareli, against appellant in Bail application No.1132 of 2026; Suman @ Preeti Versus State of U.P. & Crime o. 139/2024, U/s323,504,506, I.P.C.& 3(1) (Da, Dha) S.C./S.T. Act.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was initially granted interim bail vide order dated 16.04.2026 and the matter was fixed for final disposal of the bail application. However, due to personal reasons, she could not appear before the court below on the date fixed. Consequently, the court below issued a non-bailable warrant against her vide order dated 11.05.2026.

Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the provisions of the SC/ST Act are not attracted in the present case. However, he does not wish to press the appeal on merits and submits that the appellant intends to participate in the court proceedings, particularly in view of the fact that she had earlier been granted interim bail. It is further submitted that the appellant undertakes to appear before the trial court on each and every date fixed and shall fully cooperate in the proceedings.

CRLA No. 1558 of 2026

2

Learned State Counsel submitted that if the appellant appears before the trial court on each and every date fixed and cooperates in the proceedings, he has no objection to her release on bail.

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, the present appeal is disposed of.

Let the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. Considering that the appellant is a lady and having regard to the provisions of Section 437 Cr.P.C., as well as in the interest of justice, it is directed that she shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- along with one surety of the like amount in accordance with law and in the light of the judgment rendered in Bacchi Devi Vs. State of UP and Another reported in 2025 SCC OnLine AII 5286

The trial court shall accept the personal bond and surety furnished by the appellant and release her forthwith without insisting upon prior verification of the surety bonds. The verification process may be undertaken subsequently in accordance with law.

It is made clear that in case the appellant fails to appear before the trial court on any date fixed without sufficient cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

(Praveen Kumar Giri,J.)

June 10, 2026

V. Sinha

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench