Smt. Rana Bano v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another

1. Heard Sri Shakti, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shikhar Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 24.06.2025 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court: " 1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Ramakar Shukla, Advocate on behalf of complainant/informant is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.423 of 2024, under Sections 315, 316(4), 336(3), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., P.S.- Lambuwa, District- Sultanpur.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He further submits that the applicant is working as Principal in a private college and she was not involved in committing any offence. He added that the main allegation is against the Accountant, namely, Shubhlaxmi Yadav who had received the alleged amount in her account through QR code. He also submits that after inquiry it was found that the Accountant was involved in 2 NABAIL No. 689 of 2025 committing the offence. Further submission is that the applicant is a woman and has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and charge-sheet has been filed thus, there is no possibility that she would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. Adding his arguments, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and no further custodial interrogation is required in this matter and the applicant has undertaken that she will always remain present before the trial court as and when required. He also submits that there is acute apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the receipts were issued in the handwriting of the applicant and even the amount has also been received by her. He added that after thorough inquiry it was found that the applicant was involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, she is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

6. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the applicant is a woman and working as Principal in a reputed private college. It is also noticed by this Court that the applicant has co- operated in the trial proceedings and the charge sheet has been filed as also the applicant has no criminal history and the applicant has undertaken that she will always remain present before the trial court as and when required. This Court is, prima facie, of the view that no further custodial interrogation is required in this matter.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Smt. Rana Bano shall be released forthwith, in case of her arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on her furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or 3 NABAIL No. 689 of 2025 tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

9. Let a counter affidavit be filed by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as by learned A.G.A. within a period of two weeks.

10. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within one week thereafter.

11. List/put up this matter in the second week of August, 2025. "

3. The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the anticipatory bail application. The learned A.G.A has not alleged any misuse of the liberty of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

4. The learned A.G.A has submitted that the investigation has been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted on 14.01.2025.

5. In these circumstances, this Court finds no good ground to take a view different from the view taken by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 24.06.2025 granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

6. In view of above, the interim order dated 24.06.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) October 6, 2025 Preeti PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Shakti, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shikhar Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 24.06.2025 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court: " 1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Ramakar Shukla, Advocate on behalf of complainant/informant is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.423 of 2024, under Sections 315, 316(4), 336(3), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S., P.S.- Lambuwa, District- Sultanpur.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He further submits that the applicant is working as Principal in a private college and she was not involved in committing any offence. He added that the main allegation is against the Accountant, namely, Shubhlaxmi Yadav who had received the alleged amount in her account through QR code. He also submits that after inquiry it was found that the Accountant was involved in 2 NABAIL No. 689 of 2025 committing the offence. Further submission is that the applicant is a woman and has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and charge-sheet has been filed thus, there is no possibility that she would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses. Adding his arguments, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and no further custodial interrogation is required in this matter and the applicant has undertaken that she will always remain present before the trial court as and when required. He also submits that there is acute apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the receipts were issued in the handwriting of the applicant and even the amount has also been received by her. He added that after thorough inquiry it was found that the applicant was involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, she is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

6. Learned AGA appearing for the State has also supported the contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the applicant is a woman and working as Principal in a reputed private college. It is also noticed by this Court that the applicant has co- operated in the trial proceedings and the charge sheet has been filed as also the applicant has no criminal history and the applicant has undertaken that she will always remain present before the trial court as and when required. This Court is, prima facie, of the view that no further custodial interrogation is required in this matter.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Smt. Rana Bano shall be released forthwith, in case of her arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on her furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or 3 NABAIL No. 689 of 2025 tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

9. Let a counter affidavit be filed by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as by learned A.G.A. within a period of two weeks.

10. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within one week thereafter.

11. List/put up this matter in the second week of August, 2025. "

3. The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the anticipatory bail application. The learned A.G.A has not alleged any misuse of the liberty of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

4. The learned A.G.A has submitted that the investigation has been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted on 14.01.2025.

5. In these circumstances, this Court finds no good ground to take a view different from the view taken by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 24.06.2025 granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

6. In view of above, the interim order dated 24.06.2025 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) October 6, 2025 Preeti PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench