Allowed

Geeta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2023ABAIL/13301/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the applicant, Geeta, in a POCSO and IPC case. The court granted bail on the ground of parity with co-accused who had already been granted similar relief, noting the applicant had no criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant Geeta released forthwith on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on personal bond and two sureties.

Geeta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228259

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13301 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Geeta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar,Lakshman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.70 of 2023, under Sections 376(2)(i), 313, 344, 109 IPC and 17/4(2)/6 of POCSO Act at Police Station- Kadaura, District Jalaun with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the case of the applicant is at a better footing to the co-accused persons, namely, Santosh Kumar and Brijesh Kumar, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.11565 of 2023. Therefore, the present applicant is also entitled for anticipatory bail on the ground of parity. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that she will cooperate in the trial failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶10

The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by her.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of

¶12

U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Geeta be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i). that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(ii). that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶22

Order Date :- 02.12.2023

¶23

Ravi Kant

¶24

(Krishan Pahal, J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Geeta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geeta 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suneel Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dashrath Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Satyaram Vs State of U.P.

Amir Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Yadav Vs State of U.P.