Sindhu Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sindhu Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of finally with a direction that if the petitioners appear before the Court below and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered in the light of Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCC 51; the principal prayer in the writ petition was refused and interim order, if any, stands vacated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the prayer made in the writ petition challenging the FIR dated 21.02.2026 (Case Crime No. 0039 of 2026, Section 87 B.N.S., Police Station Seorahi, District Kushinagar) should be granted. +1 more

Court's answer

The prayer prayed for by means of the present writ petition (challenge to the FIR) is refused.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that if the petitioners appear before the Court below and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered by the Court below in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).

Key takeaways

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Rajeev Misra and Sudhanshu Chauhan, JJ.; decided 20.04.2026) in Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 5565 of 2026, Smt. Sindhu Kumari and another v. State of U.P. and 3 others: petitioners challenged an FIR dated 21.02.2026 registered as Case Crime No. 0039 of 2026 under Section 87 B.N.S. at Police Station Seorahi, District Kushinagar, lodged on the report of first informant respondent 4 Ramawadh Gaud. After arguments, learned counsel for petitioners gave up the prayer made in the writ petition and contended that interest of justice would be served by final disposal with a direction to the court below to consider the petitioners' bail application in the light of Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCC 51; the learned AGA for State respondents 1, 2 and 3 did not oppose. The Court found no legal impediment to accepting the submission, refused the prayer made in the writ petition, disposed of the petition finally with the direction that if the petitioners appear before the court below and apply for bail, their bail application be considered in the light of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), and vacated the interim order, if any.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5565 of 2026

Sindhu Kumari And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Responden
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Akhilesh Bharti, Kamlesh Prasad
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

.....Respondent(s)

Court No. - 49

HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J.

Heard Mr. Akhilesh Bharti, the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned AGA representing State respondents 1,2 & 3.

Perused the record.

Petitioners Smt. Sindhu Kumari and another have approached this Court by means of present Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 21.02.2026 lodged by first informant respondent 4 Ramawadh Gaud and registered as Case Crime No. 0039 of 2026, under Section 87 B.N.S., Police Station Seorahi, District Kushinagar.

After some arguments, the learned counsel for petitioners fairly gave up the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition. It is however contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that interest of justice shall better be served in case the present writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to Court below to consider the bail application of petitioners in the light of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another (2022) 10 SCC 51 .

Learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2&3 does not oppose the aforesaid fair submission urged by the learned counsel for petitioners.

We do not find any legal impediment for not accepting the fair submission urged by the learned counsel for petitioner.

CRLP No. 5565 of 2026

2

Accordingly, the prayer prayed for by means of present writ petition is refused.

Having heard the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. for State respondents 1,2&3, upon perusal of record and considering the submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioner as noted herein above, we dispose of this writ petition finally with a direction that in case petitioners appear before Court below and apply for bail, then their bail application shall be considered by Court below in the light of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

(Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)

April 20, 2026 Arif

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad