Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30355 of 2018 Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Yadav,Rajmani Yadav
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Ajendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajmani Yadav, & Sri Anil Kumar Yadav, learned counsels for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.256 of 2018, under Sections 366, 376, 313, 120-B IPC, Police Station Shivpur, District Varanasi, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the victim is a major girl aged about 20 years. According to her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., they were having a deep love affair and it is a case where the consensual sexual relations with the victim. Subsequently, when he got married, the victim was exerting pressure on him to marry due to which, he has been falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that it is not disputed that the victim is aged about 20 years and she was having an affair with the applicant but the applicant sexually exploited her on a false promise of marriage and when she became pregnant, he got the pregnancy aborted. They further pointed out that the applicant on one hand was sexually exploited the victim by making false promise and on the other hand, he solemnized marriage with some other lady and pacified the victim that under pressure of his family members, he had to marry another girl but he will not keep her and shall solemnize marriage with the prosecutrix. Even subsequent to his marriage, he continued physical relations with the victim and the prosecutrix on a faint hope and on the false promise made by the applicant became the victim of applicant and, therefore, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
The bail application is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Hasnain