Allowed

Kundali @ Vimla and Another v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 May 2022BAIL/11538/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted bail to two female applicants, wife and daughter of a main accused, implicating them in a POCSO case. Relying on the release of co-accused and the nature of the allegations, the Court directed release on personal bond with two sureties despite no opposition from the AGA appearing in court.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants on personal bond with two reliable sureties subject to conditions of not influencing witnesses and cooperating in trial.

Kundali @ Vimla and Another Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11538 of 2022 Applicant :- Kundali @ Vimla And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Avadhesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶3

As per letter of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad, dated 21.04.2022, the service upon the opposite party No.2 is sufficient, however, today when the bail application was taken up no one responded to oppose the same.

¶4

Learned AGA states that he has complete instructions in the matter.

¶5

Accordingly, this Court proceeded to hear the present bail application on merits.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicants seeking bail in Case Crime No. 79 of 2021, under Sections-363, 34 I.P.C. and Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station-Kotwali Fatehgarh, District Farrukhabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused-applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. The applicant Nos.1 and 2 are wife and daughter, respectively, of the main accused Jagdish, who has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 23.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32635 of 2021. It is stated that other coaccused namely Pramod Kumar has also been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 02.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1707 of 2022. The applicants have no role in committing the crime. It is just to harass the entire family the applicants have been implicated. It is stated that the both the applicants are lady and being so are entitled to the benefit of Section 437 CrPC. In these circumstances of the case, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, both the applicants may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and the applicants are in jail since 05.07.2021 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute above contention made by the learned counsel for the accusedapplicant as also that the co-accused persons have already been released on bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind that co-accused persons have already

¶12

been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶13

Let applicants- Kundali @ Vimla and Km. Doli be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on their furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(1) Applicants will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

(2) Applicants will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.

¶16

(3) Applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(6) 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.

¶20

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 12.5.2022 Vinay/-

¶22

Digitally signed by VINAY KUMAR Date: 2022.05.12 17:10:41 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kundali @ Vimla and Another v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kundali @ Vimla and Another v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

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

Nihal Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Danish Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Daman Munda Vs Union of India.

Munnan Vs State of U.P.

Amit @ Rinku Vs State of U.P.