Allowed

Reema Chaursiya v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023BAIL/52942/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for alleged rape and other offences, the Court allowed bail. The applicant, accused of making a rape video, was granted bail subject to standard conditions, noting she was languishing in jail with no criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two heavy local sureties conditional on not tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses.

Reema Chaursiya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52942 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Reema Chaursiya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Saroj,Nitesh Vishwakarma,Rageeni Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abida Syed

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State, Ms. Abida Syed, learned counsel for the Child Welfare Committee, Jaunpur, and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against the applicant is that she had made a video of commission of rape by the accused Sanket alias Kalloo. He submits that the main accused Sanket @ Kallu is a fast friend of the informant and he used to make frequent visit and taking undue advantage of the same, the accused Sanket @ Kallu has committed the offence, when in fact the applicant is not concerned with the said accused. He further submits that the applicant's husband and the informant's father were real brother meaning thereby, the applicant is the aunt (chachi) of the informant, since the applicant's husband has already expired only to grab here share, the applicant has been roped in the present case. He next argued that no such video is on record to demonstrate that the applicant had made such video. He thus submits that no offence against the applicant is made out. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the

¶7

counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 19.10.2022 having no criminal history. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let applicant Reema Chaurasiya involved in Case Crime No.1237 of 2022 under Sections 120-B, 376, 506 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station Badalapur, District Jaunpur, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶10

A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date

¶13

fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.

¶15

E. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 S.Ali

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Reema Chaursiya v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reema Chaursiya 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

Rinku Vs State of U.P.

Kaluaa Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lalitesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Gangaram @ Sandeep Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arif Ali Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Sonu @ Aman Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others