Allahabad High Court Grants Transit Pre-Arrest Bail to Woman Summoned at 9 PM, Calls Police Action Improper

The Allahabad High Court recently granted transit anticipatory bail to Sushila Yadav, a woman who was summoned at 9:00 PM to a Delhi police station despite not being named in the FIR.

The bench of Justice Rajeev Singh took serious exception to a notice sent to Yadav via WhatsApp by Sub-Inspector Shivpal Singh of Police Station Mayapuri, Delhi, directing her to appear at the station late at night. Yadav, a resident of Sitapur in Uttar Pradesh, had approached the high court fearing illegal detention and harassment.

Her counsel pointed out that she was not mentioned in the FIR related to cheating and criminal conspiracy (under Sections 420 and 120B IPC), yet was being called to appear in person at a time explicitly barred under procedural safeguards, especially for women.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Priya Indoria vs. State of Karnataka (2024) 4 SCC 746, the court reaffirmed that basic procedural protections—especially for women—cannot be ignored under the pretext of investigation.

The Additional Government Advocate representing the State of Uttar Pradesh also conceded that the applicant was indeed not named in the FIR.

Taking this into account, the court held that there was a legitimate apprehension of arrest and granted Yadav transit anticipatory bail, directing that she be released forthwith if detained, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000.

"Notice categorically reveals that applicant being a lady has been called at Police Station Mayapuri on 13.06.2025 at 21:00 hours and the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and the alleged offence is triable by the Magistrate, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled for transit anticipatory bail," court said. 

Further, court said that the action of the officer who issued notice was not proper.

Therefore, the judge ordered that the Senior Registrar of the High Court communicate the order to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi for necessary for information and appropriate action.

Case Title: Sushila Yadav vs State of UP and 2 Others

Download judgment here