Allowed

Ritu Patel v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2023ABAIL/5907/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to Ritu Patel, standing accused in a case involving enticement under IPC 368 and POCSO. Noting her elder sister relationship to the main accused and lack of charges, the court held her a fit case for bail pending filing of the police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

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

Ritu Patel Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:145944

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5907 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ritu Patel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Apprehending her arrest in Case Crime No.44 of 2023, under Section 368 IPC and Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station Mirzamurad, District Varanasi, the present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant - Ritu Patel seeking anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the minor daughter of the informant was enticed away by the named accused persons on the intervening night of 20/21.02.2023. F.I.R. was lodged on 23.02.2023 under Sections 363, 366 IPC and investigation started, which is still going on against the present applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of arrest in the abovementioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against her. She has been falsely implicated in this matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that coaccused Udal Patel and Kamlesh Patel have been granted regular bail. There is no role of the present applicant in the commission of the alleged crime. Main role has been attributed to co-accused Udal Patel. Even in the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., it is nowhere alleged that she was kidnapped or enticed away by the present applicant. Applicant is the elder sister of the main accused Udal Patel. No charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant so far and she is cooperating with the investigation of the case. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

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, likelihood 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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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 the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.

¶14

9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till the filing of police report under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House

¶16

Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 18.7.2023 ss

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ritu Patel v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritu Patel v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Haresh Kumar Kushwah Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jhamman Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umashankar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Piyush Verma Vs State of U.P.

Aman Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another