Seeta v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29005 of 2023 Applicant :- Seeta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Umesh Chandra Tiwari Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶2There are allegations in the F.I.R. against the applicant that she took the child victim to her house and her intimate video was made and the same was also made viral.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The video was not made by the applicant. Although, the incident is alleged to have taken place in her house, no recovery of any incriminating video or mobile phone has been made from the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 15.07.2022 and has no criminal history to her credit. The alleged video was made by co-accused, Arjun.

¶4On the other hand learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail, but they could not dispute the submissions urged by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶5Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶6Let the applicant-Seeta, involved in Case Crime No.185 of 2022, under Sections-376, 120B IPC and Sections-5/17 of POCSO Act and Section-67(A) of I.T. Act, Police Station-Faizganj Behta, District-Budaun, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against her in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶7In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶8Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶9Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.

¶10Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days. Order Date :- 5.12.2023 Saif High Court of Judicature at Allahabad