Allowed

Smt. Prabhawati Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023ABAIL/5407/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Smt. Prabhawati Devi, charged with enticement and related offences under IPC and POCSO, granting bail till the filing of the police report.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till filing of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties.

Smt. Prabhawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:140745

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5407 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Prabhawati Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Ram Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. However, none is present for opposite party no.2 despite sufficient service of notice.

¶7

Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Smt. Prabhawati Devi in Case Crime No.188 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC & 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station - Bairiya, District - Ballia.

¶8

Facts in brief are that on 23.07.2021 at about 7 p.m. the victim was enticed away by co-accused Arvind Yadav and Bhuran Yadav. The present applicant Smt. Kalawati Devi is Mausi of co-accused Arvind Yadav. Allegation against this applicant is that she assisted Arvind Yadav in making enticement of the victim.

¶9

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on in the matter. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case, the applicant being related to the co-accused Arvind Yadav, has been named in the F.I.R. It is also submitted that this applicant is a married lady and lives on some other place. It is next submitted that co-accused, Smt. Kalawati Devi, has already been granted anticipatory till filing of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. by the coordiante Bench of this Court vide order

¶11

dated 23.01.2023 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.571 of 2022, and as such, the present accused applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and submitted that this applicant is Mausi of co-accused Arvind Yadav against whom allegation of enticement of the victim is made who was major at the time of alleged incident.

¶13

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶14

In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

¶15

Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till filing of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. in the matter.

¶16

10. The application is allowed .

¶17

In the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the

¶18

following conditions:-

¶19

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

¶20

(ii) 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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶22

In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim protection granted to the applicant.

¶23

Order Date :- 13.7.2023 Shivangi

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Prabhawati Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prabhawati Devi 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

Hari Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vandana Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arman Mehandi Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Kumar Pathak and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Iqbal Khan Vs State of U.P.