Allahabad High Court
Pooja Awasthi vs State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 6 May, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 264 of 2022
Appellant :- Pooja Awasthi
Respondent :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- O.P. Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Neeraj Singh,Ram Chandra Dwivedi
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Hard copy of the appeal is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 against the judgment and order dated 1.2.2022 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court no.11/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Unnao in S.S.T. No. 1348 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2021,under Sections 313, 314, 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, relating to Police-Station- Dahi, District Unnao, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The only role assigned to the appellant is that he accompanied with the deceased and the family members to save the life of the deceased who went to Pooja Hospital where the abortion of the deceased was conducted by the doctors and thereafter the deceased died due to Anaemia C Septicaemia after ten days of the alleged incident. Except to this, no specific role has been assigned against the appellant. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that no disclosed offence as mentioned in F.I.R. is made out against the appellant. The co-accused Ram Kishore Pal @ Kishore Pal has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 266 of 2022. Therefore, the appellant is also entitled for bail on parity.
The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.11.2021 without having any previous criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2, the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order, hence the applicant is not entitled for bail.
After hearing the rival submissions of the parties, and perused the record, without expressing any opinion on merits, I find that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant/applicant.
Impugned order dated 1.2.2022 is hereby set aside.
The appeal is hereby allowed.
Let appellant- Pooja Awasthi be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence.
(ii) The appellant 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.
(iii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her 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.
(iv) In case, the appellant 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 appellant 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.
(v) The appellant 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 appellant 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.
Order Date :- 6.5.2022
Shravan
