JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh. J.
1. Heard Sri Jitan Tiwari, Sri B.B. Shukla and Sri P.C. Srivastava learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A, and Sri Tahabin Islam learned counsel for the complainant.
2. This application is filed by the applicant, Alim with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case Crime No. 501 of 2005, under Sections 376 and 506, I.P.C. P.S. Gajraula, District J.P. Nagar.
3. From the perusal of the record it appears that in the present case the F.I.R. was lodged by one Sri Khacheru at P.S. Gajraula, District J.P. Nagar on 10.5.2005 at 8.30 p.m. against the applicant in respect of the incident which had occurred on 10.5.2005 at about 3.00 p.m. in the jungle of village Naipura. The distance of the police station was 3 km. from the alleged place of the occurrence.
4. According to the prosecution version the family of the first informant is earns its livelihood by way of doing labour. On the date of the alleged occurrence the porsecutrix and Smt Gulshan had gone to the field of the applicant to do the agricultural work at about 8.00 a.m. but Smt Gulshan was sent by the applicant to Bharat Hotel to attend the call of telephone, so the prosecutrix remained alone in the field where she was raped by the applicant at about 3.00 p.m. The rape was committed by the applicant by using the force and he extended a threat of committing her murder in case any F.I.R. was lodged by her.
5. From the perusal of the medical examination report of prosecutrix Km. Noorjahan it appears that her hymen was intact and there was injury in a form of laceration about 1/2 x 0.1 cm on the post vaginal valve and bleeding and tenderness around the margin of injury red in colour was found. According to medical examination report the injury was simple, fresh and caused by blunt object and according to supplementary examination report the age of the prosecutrix is between 14 to 17 years and there was evidence of penetration. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr. P. C. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity has no substance at this stage, it will be considered at the stage of trial of any such evidence is adduced.
6. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected at this stage.