Allahabad High Court
Smt. Sameera Bano vs State Of U.P. on 21 April, 2020
Author: Anil Kumar
Bench: Anil Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?In Chamber Case :- BAIL No. - 11789 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Sameera` Bano Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Nand Shukla,Amrit Kumar Tiwari,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Irfan Alam,Kamini Kumari Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Mohd Munis Jafari Hon'ble Anil Kumar,J.
In view of Corona Virus epidemic, appearance of learned counsel for parties has been dispensed with owing to the lockdown and the bail is being decided on the basis of material available on record.
Bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 661/2019, under Sections 363, 365, 506 I.P.C. & Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station - Bikapur, District - Faizabad/Ayodhya.
As per the case of the complainant in the F.I.R. which was lodged on 04.10.2019 that on 03.10.2019 at about 04.00 p.m. the3 complainant's daughter namely Saba, was forcibly taken away by the applicant and thereafter she was locked in a room and was given intoxicated substance and further she was threatened for dire consequences.
The points which were taken by the applicant while challenging the impugned F.I.R. for the purpose of bail in the affidavit filed in support of the bail applicant are as under:-
(a) There is some civil dispute between the parties in respect to the sahan land and due to the said fact with oblique motive and purpose, the applicant who is a lady in order to harass her, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged.
(b) There is no previous criminal history of the applicant.
On behalf of the complainant a counter affidavit has been field in which the statement of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has been annexed as Annexure nos. CA-1 & 2 respectively.
Medical examination report of the victim who was medically examined by Dr. Ranjana Khare, Medical Officer, District Hospital, Faizabad is also annexed.
Medical examination report given by Chief Medical Officer, Ayodhya after examining the victim on 11.10.2019 is also on record along with the counter affidavit.
After going through the documents on record, specially the statement given by victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the medical examination report submitted by District Medical Officer, Faizabad Ranjan Khare who had medically examined her and the report of Chief Medical Officer Ayodhya who had also examined the victim 11.10.2019.
From the the bare reading of the statement given by the victim under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the position which emerged out is that on the date of incident i.e. on 03.10.2019 at 04.00 p.m. when she was washing the untensiles, the applicant has said to her that her brother is ill after hearing the same, she went with the applicant who forcibly took her in a Bolero Car and her legs and hand were tied with a rope, thereafter some intoxication substance was given to her,as such she became unconscious.
In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has further stated that :-
" ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? | ???? ??? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? | ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?? ????????? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? |"
Taking into consideration the said facts as well as the medical examination report of the victim which was done on 05.10.2019 at 01.00 p.m. by Dr. Ranjana Khare, Medical Officer, District Hospital, Faizabad, And the report dated 11.10.2019 submitted by Chief Medical Officer and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history which is evidence from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State.
Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application,without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Smt. Sameera Bano, involved in Case Crime No. 661/2019, under Sections 363, 365, 506 I.P.C. & Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station - Bikapur, District - Faizabad/Ayodhya, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 him in accordance with law.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court of Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(vii) Difficulty arising in arranging of sureties because of lockdown has already been dealt with by a Division Bench of this Court in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No.564 of 2020. Directions issued therein shall be applicable in the present case which are as follows:-
"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."
Order Date :- 21.4.2020 Ravi/