Sujata vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sujata vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. allowed: appellant Sujata to be released on bail during pendency of the appeal on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Session Trial No.625 of 2016, subject to deposition of the entire amount of fine, if not already deposited; photocopies of the bonds to be transmitted to the High Court forthwith for the appeal record. Jail appeal admitted; to be listed in due course.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, convicted and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment and having undergone almost half the sentence, should be released on bail during pendency of the jail appeal under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C.

Court's answer

Bail during pendency of the appeal is granted: considering the unlikelihood of early hearing due to heavy pendency, the punishment awarded, the custody period (almost five years, about half the ten-year sentence) and the absence of any other criminal history, and without commenting on the merits, the Court found it a fit case for grant of bail; remaining grounds are left for final adjudication of the appeal.

Ratio / Principle

The appellant-appellant Sujata is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Session Trial No.625 of 2016, subject to deposition of the entire amount of fine, if not already deposited; photocopies of the bonds are to be transmitted to the High Court for the record of the appeal.

Key takeaways

The jail appeal is admitted and is to be listed in due course.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 75; Saurabh Srivastava, J.), order dated January 13, 2026 in Jail Appeal No. 98 of 2024, Sujata v. State of U.P. The Court allowed the appellant's application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. and admitted the jail appeal. The appellant had been sentenced by the learned trial court, by judgment and order dated 25.01.2022 in Session Trial No.625 of 2016 (State vs. Durga Kamle and Others), arising out of Case Crime No.119 of 2016, under Sections 3(1), 4(1), 5(1), 6(1), 7(1ka) and 9 of The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Sections 373, 370(3) I.P.C. (P.S. Kotwali, District- Allahabad), to ten years' rigorous imprisonment. Noting the custody period of almost five years as on the date of the application (detention certificate dated 20.10.2023) — meaning she had completed almost half the sentence — the absence of any other criminal history, and the unlikelihood of early hearing of the appeal due to heavy pendency, and without commenting on the merits, the Court found it a fit case for grant of bail during pendency of the appeal. Bail was granted on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to deposition of the entire amount of fine, if not already deposited; photocopies of the bonds were directed to be transmitted to the High Court to be kept on the record of the appeal. The appeal was admitted and listed in due course. No precedent was cited or discussed in the order.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

JAIL APPEAL No. - 98 of 2024

Sujata

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Vishesh Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A., Raj Kumar Kesari

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Order on Application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C.

Heard Sri Vishesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that vide judgement and order dated 25.01.2022 passed by learned trial court, punishment of ten years of rigorous imprisonment was awarded to the applicant and as per the detention certificate dated 20.10.2023 annexed as Annexure No.2 to the affidavit, applicant has already incarcerated in jail almost five years as on today, meaning thereby she has completed almost half of sentence in jail. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant further stated that applicant has no other criminal history credited in her favour and there is hardly any case of misuse of bail extended to her during trial. It is lastly submitted that disposal of appeal will take time and accused-appellant undertakes that she will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall remain present before the Court as and when required and she will cooperate with the hearing of appeal.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer made in the instant application, but did not dispute the above facts submitted by learned counsel for the appellant.

After having the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the unlikelihood of early hearing of appeal due to heavy pendency, punishment awarded and specifically the custody period as well as the fact that applicant has no other criminal history to her credit, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for grant of bail during pendency of the appeal. Rest of the other grounds shall be subject matter of final adjudication of this appeal.

Let the applicant-appellant, Sujata , be released on bail on her furnishing personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned in Session Trial No.625 of 2016 (State vs. Durga Kamle and

JAPL No. 98 of 2024

2

Others) arising out of Case Crime No.119 of 2016, under Sections 3(1), 4(1), 5(1), 6(1), 7(1ka), 9 of The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Sections 373, 370(3) I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District- Allahabad, subject to deposition of entire amount of fine, if already not deposited.

As soon as personal bonds and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

Order on Appeal

Admit.

List in due course.

January 13, 2026 Saif

(Saurabh Srivastava,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad