Allahabad High Court
JITU RAIKWAR @ JITENDRA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicants on the ground of parity with a co‑accused who had already been released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Jitu Raikwar and Viru Raikwar, accused in Crime No. 145 of 2025 under several IPC sections and sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicants, who have been in custody since 29 March 2025 and have no prior criminal record, argued that a co‑accused, Manmohan Raikwar, had already been released on bail, and therefore they should be granted bail on the ground of parity. The State and the informant opposed the bail but did not dispute the parity argument. Relying on the precedent of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs State of U.P. (1993) and Supreme Court decisions in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs CBI (2021) and Satender Kumar Antil vs CBI (2022), the Court held that the applicants satisfied the criteria for bail. Accordingly, the Court granted bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions such as non‑tampering with evidence and mandatory appearance before the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the applicants despite the serious charges under the IPC and POCSO Act.
- Whether the principle of parity with a co‑accused already released on bail warrants granting bail to the applicants.
- Whether the applicants' lack of prior criminal history influences the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 125, 333, 351, 352, 49, 62, 64, 74
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 5, 6
Subjects
- bail
- parity
- co-accused
- Criminal Procedure Code
- IPC
- POCSO Act
- high court
- conditions of bail
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21616 of 2025
Jitu Raikwar @ Jitendra And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Pandey, Satya Prakash Rathor
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Chandra Prakash Tiwari, G.A.
Court No. - 65
(Sl. No.92 out of 259)
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A. notice to the
informant has been served on 4.6.2025.
2. Heard Shri Satya Prakash Rathor, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri
Chandra Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri
Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No. 145 of 2025, under Sections 125,
49, 74, 351(2), 352, 333, 64, 62 BNS and 5/6 POCSO Act,, Police Station
Kotwali Nagar, District Mahoba, during the pendency of trial.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that similarly placed
co-accused person, Manmohan Raikwar has already been enlarged on bail
by this Court vide order dated 13.4.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 21481 of 2025. The applicants are languishing in jail since
29.3.2025, having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the
role of the applicants is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been
enlarged on bail, they are also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground
of parity.
5. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. and
learned counsel for the informant. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of
parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicants, have
not been disputed by him.
BAIL No. 21616 of 2025
2
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in light of the
judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of
U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgements passed by the Supreme Court in
Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation,
MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation and Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, the Court is of the
view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is
allowed on the ground of parity.
7. Let the applicants- Jitu Raikwar @ Jitendra and Viru Raikwar @
Virendra involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail
on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following
conditions.
(i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates
fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement
under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the
applicants 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 them in
accordance with law.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants
shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.
(Krishan Pahal,J.)
April 23, 2026
Shalini
Digitally signed by :-
SHALINI JAISWAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…