Allowed

Sani Deval v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2020BAIL/34972/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that applicant Sani Deval is entitled to bail in proceedings under IPC and POCSO Act where co-accused already secured bail. Bail granted subject to conditions regarding witness tampering and attendance, without expressing opinion on merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail furnishing personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding witness conduct and court attendance.

Sani Deval Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34972 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sani Deval Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi,Deepak Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.65 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376(D) I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kotwali Chunar, District Mirzapur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that same allegation has been levelled against the applicant as well as co-accused Ravi @ Ravi Kumar. The co-accused Ravi @ Ravi Kumar has been already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.11.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.36880 of 2020, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant except the present case and applicant is languishing in jail since 20.06.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail having identical role, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Sani Deval involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 3.12.2020 Jitendra

Sani Deval v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sani Deval 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunny Deol Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chintu Alias Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Arun Vs State of U.P. and another

Shweta Arora Das Vs State of U.P.

Harprakash Rajpal Arora Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Yadav Vs State of U.P.