Allowed

Reshma @ Nanhi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023BAIL/5725/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application arising from a case of sexual assault under the POCSO Act, the high court upheld the applicant's prayer for bail, noting she was a lady and the main role belonged to the co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence and ensuring court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5725 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Reshma @ Nanhi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kanchan Chaudhary

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Mithilesh Kumar, Shri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has come during the course of investigation. It is next contended that the applicant is not involved in the crime as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted being mother of the accused Sumit, she was implicated in the offence. It is further submitted that main allegation of committing sexual assault with victim is against the co-accused Sumit and applicant has no role in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of trial to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that she is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make herself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.12.2022 and applicant has properly explained the criminal history in para 5 of the rejoinder affidavit.

¶8

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, looking to the fact that applicant is lady and main role has been

¶10

assigned to co-accused Sumit and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Reshma @ Nanhi involved in Case Crime No. 474 of 2022, under Section 313 I.P.C. and section 16/17 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Sehramau South, District Shahjahanpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

Order Date :- 5.4.2023

¶18

Bhanu

¶19

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Reshma @ Nanhi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reshma @ Nanhi 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

Raju Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan Vs State of U.P.

Rihan @ Tata Vs State of U.P.

Azam Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Pratap Bhodoriya Vs State of U.P.