Allowed

Smt. Pooja and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2020BAIL/2450/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2450 of 2020, the Court granted bail to Smt. Pooja and Smt. Jeeta, accused under Sections 16/17 POCSO Act, subject to conditions including furnishing a personal bond with sureties once court functioning is restored.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing personal bond and sureties subject to specified conditions.

Smt. Pooja and Another Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2450 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Pooja And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh,Araf Khan,Lihazur Rahman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Smt. Pooja and Smt. Jeeta with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 613 of 2018, under Sections 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station- Govardhan, DistrictMathura, during pendency of trial.

¶7

The submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It has also been submitted that co-accused Mamta and Anna has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.22297 of 2020 and therefore the present applicant being on the same footing is also entitled for bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required and are also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon them. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are languishing in jail since 15.11.2018 having no criminal history.

¶8

Learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Having considered the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing

¶10

any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicants involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶11

The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case the applicants have been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court their bail shall be effective after the period of short-term bail comes to an end.

¶15

The applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 15.10.2020 shiv

Smt. Pooja and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Pooja and Another 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munna Qureshi @ Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Manvendra Ahirwar Alias Vishal Vs State of U.P.

Daddan Yadav Vs Union of India

Sajjad Vs State of U.P.

Jalil Vs State of U.P.

Runjhun Kapar Vs State of U.P.