NABAIL/3562/2026 of SANDHYA @ PINKY Vs STATE OF U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3562 of 2026 Court No. - 70 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.233 of 2025, under Sections 108, 316(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Friends Colony, District Etawah till conclusion of trial. 3.It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is sister of co-accused. He also submitted that the main allegation on the wife of the deceased and present applicant was living separately with her-in-law at the time of alleged incident. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. He has been falsely implicated in this case. If the applicant is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest by the police any time. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail. 5. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law on the subject finally by holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Chandra Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Alok Dixit, G.A. Sandhya @ Pinky .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till trial. 7. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion. 8. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the trial. 9. The application is allowed accordingly. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Sandhya @ Pinky, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till the end of trial on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make herself available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial. (ii) 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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by him NABAIL No. 3562 of 2026 2 before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned. 11. In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant. May 6, 2026 T.S. NABAIL No. 3562 of 2026 3 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad