Ritesh Singh @ Jeet Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and 3 Others

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 397 of 2025

Applicant :- Ritesh Singh @ Jeet Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Srivastava,Avinash Srivastava,Ram Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party.

¶6

As per office report dated 29th April, 2025 submitted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh, opposite party No.2 has been duly served but has not yet put in appearance.

¶7

Earlier vide order dated 11th April, 2025 applicant had been provided interim protection which is as follows:-

¶8

"1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State.

¶9

2. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.

¶10

3. This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.279 of 2022 under Sections 34, 323, 341 354?, 504, 506 IPC and 9G/10 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarh.

¶11

4. As per contents of First Information Report, the applicant alongwith coaccused is said to have molested the minor daughter of informant on 04.10.2022 at about 07:30 PM.

¶12

5. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and that co-accused Gokul Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2053 of 2024. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history and has cooperated during the course of investigation whereafter charge-sheet has been filed. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history.

¶13

6. Learned AGA appearing on behalf of State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail application with the submission that the contents of FIR clearly make out the sections imputed against applicant. It is however, admitted that the role of applicant is same as that of Gokul Singh who has already been granted anticipatory bail. It is also admitted that applicant does not have any criminal history.

¶14

7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for

¶15

parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that coaccused Gokul Singh having the same role has already been granted anticipatory bail. It also appears that although the victim has supported contents of FIR in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. but has refused internal and external medical examination. It is admitted that applicant has cooperated during the course of trial whereafter charge-sheet has been filed. He does not have any previous criminal history.

¶16

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Ritesh Singh @ Jeet Singh shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence;

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶19

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶22

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶23

9. List this case on 30.04.2025, as fresh alongwith service report.

¶24

10. Objections may be filed in the meantime. "

¶25

Learned A.G.A. should be provided written instructions in this matter but does not indicate any situational difference on the aspects considered while grant of interim anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶26

Considering aforesaid, interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant earlier vide order dated 11th April, 2025 is made absolute.

¶27

In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Ritesh Singh @ Jeet Singh shall be released on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.279 of 2022 under Sections 34, 323, 341 354 Kha, 504, 506 IPC and 9G/10 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarhon his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the

¶28

satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence;

¶30

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶31

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶32

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶33

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶34

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶35

The application stands allowed.

¶36

Order Date :- 15.5.2025 prabhat

¶37

Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ritesh Singh @ Jeet Singh v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Singh @ Jeet Singh v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aftab Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Kumar Singh @ Rajwal Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Mukesh Giri Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Godiya Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Divya Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Sectt.Lko and Another

Vikash Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.