Allowed

Govind Verma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2021BAIL/19083/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application for Govind Verma charged under IPC and POCSO sections. Relying on overwhelmed jail conditions during the pandemic and parity with a co-accused already on bail, the court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties while directing the trial court to expedite proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail via personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 1 Lac each.

Govind Verma Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19083 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Govind Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the coaccused Shivam @ Shivana having similar role has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 03.09.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11277 of 2021, a copy of said order has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 01.12.2020.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Govind Verma , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 248 of 2020, under Sections- 354, 323 IPC & 9/10 POCSO Act, 2012 & 3(2) (Va) SC/ST Act & Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station- Banna Devi, District- Aligarh, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. One Lac each (One should be of a family member) before the magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to

¶15

prison.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

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

¶18

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2440 , if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

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

¶20

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Arti

Govind Verma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Verma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Nigam Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Chand Vs State of U.P.

Sushil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Vishnu Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Lakhan Singh Vs State of U.P.