Smt. Sheeba Mateen vs State Of U.P.

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1583 of 2025

Smt. Sheeba Mateen

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2150 of 2025

Smt. Malika

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2171 of 2025

Smt. Safeekun Nisha

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2173 of 2025

Smt. Alnida Kadir

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2174 of 2025

Smt. Shahr Bano

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2175 of 2025

Smt Iram Anjum

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2176 of 2025

Smt Parveen Khatoon

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2177 of 2025

Smt Sanno

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2180 of 2025

Smt. Faraheena

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2193 of 2025

Smt. Rihana Khatoon

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2197 of 2025

Smt. Jahira Khatoon

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.

- 2204 of 2025

Smt. Shabana Bano

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1543 of 2025

Smt. Khalida

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

With

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1548 of 2025

Smt Jamila Khatoon

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)

:

D.M.Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

G.A.

Court No. - 82

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. As, all the anticipatory bail applications are arising out of same case crime number, therefore, all the anticipatory bail applications are being disposed off by a common order.

2. Sri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA for the State apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, instant anticipatory bail applications may be finally disposed off.

3. Heard Sri D.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Deepak Mishra, learned AGA for the State.

4. The present anticipatory bail application have been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 147 of 2013, under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13(1)(D) and 13(2) P.C. Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Barabanki, District Barabanki with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail during trial.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2013 with regard to alleged misappropriation committed by the applicants Smt. Sheeba Mateen, Smt. Safeekun Nisha, Smt. Alnida Kadir, Smt. Shahr Bano, Smt. Iram Anjum, Smt. Parveen Khatoon and Smt. Rihana Khatoon but during investigation rest of applicants have also been made accused in the present matter. He next submits, as per allegation applicants misappropriated the public money by receiving pensions of widows but entire allegations leveled against the applicants are totally false.

6. He further submits, now charge-sheet has been filed and there is no allegation that during investigation applicants did not cooperate with the investigation. He further submits, after submission of the charge-sheet even custodial interrogation of the applicants are not required. He next submits, applicants are having apprehension that if they will appear before the court concerned then they will be sent to jail.

7. He further submits, even FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2013 and therefore, there is no occasion to send the applicants in jail after twelve years specially considering the fact that they are ladies and they are not having any criminal history to their credit.

8. He further submits, even similarly placed co-accused Smt. Asia Begum and Smt. Amrin Kadir have been released on anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 05.08.2025 and 06.08.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 2120 of 2025 and 1723 of 2023 respectively.

9. He next submits, therefore, considering the above facts, applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.

11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. However, as per allegations, applicants misappropriated the public fund along with others but it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2013 and now charge-sheet has been filed and it appears, during investigation applicants have not been arrested and there is no allegation that they did not cooperate with the investigation.

13. Further, now charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicants does not appear to be necessary.

14. Further, applicants are ladies and they are not having any criminal history to their credit.

15. Further, co-accused Smt. Asia Bebum and Smt. Amrin Kadir have been released on anticipatory bail by this Court and case of applicants is almost at par with them.

16. Further, apprehension of arrest raised by applicants cannot be brushed aside.

17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail applications are allowed.

19. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Smt. Sheeba Mateen, Smt. Malika, Smt. Safeekun Nisha, Smt. Alnida Kadir, Smt. Shahr Bano, Smt. Iram Anjum, Smt. Parveen Khatoon, Smt. Sanno, Smt. Faraheena, Smt. Rihana Khatoon, Smt. Jahira Khatoon, Smt. Shabana Bano, Smt. Khalida and Smt Jamila Khatoon involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions:-

i. that the applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

ii. that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

iii. that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

v. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

20. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

21. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

(Sameer Jain,J.)

September 4, 2025

AK Pandey