Allowed

Smt. Raisa v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 May 2018BAIL/16611/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 342, 376, 120-B IPC and POCSO Act, the High Court allowed bail to the applicant, a mother of the main accused, imposing standard conditions regarding court attendance and undertaking against antedating evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions of attendance and undertaking against adjournments.

Smt. Raisa Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16611 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Raisa Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Chandra Shekhar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

Contention raised at the Bar is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been further submitted that the applicant is a married woman, her only offence is that she is the mother of main accused Raees, who facilitated the marriage of the applicant with the victim. The role of the present applicant is quite distinguishable from the main accused Raees. It has lastly been urged that the applicant is in jail since 03.02.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused,

¶10

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Smt. Raisa, involved in Case Crime No. 11 of 2018, under sections 342, 376, 120-B IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Fatehpur, District Saharanpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶13

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶14

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT

¶15

SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶17

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶18

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this court. Order Date :- 4.5.2018

¶19

shailesh

Smt. Raisa v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Raisa v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Rais Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj @ Sandeep Vs State of U.P.

Pooja Devi Vs State of U.P.

Vaseer Vs State of U.P.