Nandini Alias Pari vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

Nandini Alias Pari vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to applicant Nandini @ Pari on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions recorded in the order (no tampering with evidence; personal appearance before the trial court on dates fixed, including for proceedings under S.313 CrPC/351 BNSS; breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail).

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Nandini @ Pari, in custody since 25-2-2025 in the case of FIR No. 08 of 2025 (District Gorakhpur) under Ss. 137(2), 70(2), 61(2) BNS 2023, Ss. 5/6 POCSO Act 2012 and Ss. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 ITPA 1956, is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with co-accused Muskan @ Mala, who has already been released on bail.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the facts, circumstances or merits of the case, and in view of the principles laid down by this Court in Munna Putra Nanki Khan (1993 Cri LJ 938) and by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Bishnoi (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021) and Satendra Kumar Antil (2022 INSC 690), the applicant is entitled to bail on the basis of parity.

Ratio / Principle

On the basis of parity, the applicant's bail application is accepted/granted.

Key takeaways

The incarcerated applicant Nandini @ Pari shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.ratio¶¶16
Condition (i): the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence.ratio¶¶17
Condition (ii): the applicant shall personally appear before the trial court on the dates fixed for (1) commencement of the case, (2) framing of the charge and (3) recording of her statement under S.313 CrPC/351 BNSS; if in the trial court's view her absence is deliberate or without sufficient cause, this concession shall be withdrawn, treating such conduct as misuse of the liberty of bail, and action taken against her according to law.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10735 of 2025, decided 11.4.2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:53652): Bail allowed to applicant Nandini @ Pari (in custody since 25-2-2025; no criminal history) in the case of FIR No. 08 of 2025 (District Gorakhpur) under Ss. 137(2), 70(2), 61(2) BNS 2023, Ss. 5/6 POCSO Act 2012 and Ss. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 ITPA 1956, solely on the ground of parity with co-accused Muskan @ Mala, already enlarged on bail by this Court on 18-3-2025 in Misc. Bail Application No. 7885 of 2025; the State did not dispute the factual parity. Reliance placed on the principles in Munna Putra Nanki Khan v. Uttar Pradesh Sarkar (1993 Cri LJ 938), Paras Ram Bishnoi v. Director, Central Bureau of Investigation (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021) and Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022 INSC 690), expressly without expressing any opinion on the facts, circumstances or merits. Release ordered on a personal bond and two sureties of like amount, conditioned on: (i) no tampering with evidence; (ii) personal appearance before the trial court on dates fixed for commencement of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under S.313 CrPC/351 BNSS, deliberate or unexplained absence leading to withdrawal of the concession as misuse of the liberty of bail; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation; identity, status and residence of applicant and sureties to be verified before sureties are accepted.