Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13666 of 2018 Applicant :- Ankit Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, assisted by Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant at length and learned AGA.
By means of the instant bail application the applicant is seeking bail in Case Crime No. 650 of 2017, under sections 354-C, 366, 328, 376, 506 and 509 IPC, P.S. Badagaon, District Varanasi. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.01.2018. in connection with the aforesaid case crime.
As per submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the FIR of the alleged incident, occurred from 01.02.2017 to 22.10.2017, was lodged on 29.10.2017 under sections 354-C, 366, 328, 376, 506, 509 IPC in the aforesaid Police Station and District against sole named accused applicant Ankit Singh. According to the FIR the age of the prosecutrix 21 years and according to her High School Certificate-2013 her date of birth is 10.05.1997. As per narration of the text of the FIR, about 8 months back, whilst the victim was bathing in her roofless make shift bathroom, the applicant- Ankit Singh had taken her nude photographs and started black mailing by threatening that all those photographs would made viral on the social media. When the victim pressurized him to delete all such photographs of her, he persisted her to accompany him. It has been further averred therein that on 22.10.2017, at about 9.50 A.M., the applicant took her to a hotel situated at Babatpur, made her drink intoxicated cold drink, outraged her modesty and extended threats with dire consequences. Further he submitted that it is highly improbable that a grown up girl of 21 years (victim) would be subjected to constant sexual assault by the applicant and she would not utter a single word. She appears to be a consenting party as per her own conduct. Besides this, that no such photograph was recovered by the police investigating team or any call from the mobile phone set of the applicant, therefore, there is no section can be applied under any Cyber law in the array of the already imposed sections.
This Court has carefully perused the statements recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., of the victim besides many other statements of the relevant witnesses, who gave their respective statements at different point of time in the case. In her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has reiterated exactly the FIR version except some new revelations as on a different ID the applicant, in connivance with the Hotel Manager, had booked the room for committing the heinous crime, as narrated above. In the statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., recorded on 10.11.2017, the victim narrated that at the relevant time she was living in a Kachcha house and used to bathe in a make shift surrounding at the gate of the house and on a day when she was bathing outside the house, taking (mis)advantage of the site, the applicant snapped her nude photographs and made videos and thereafter she was being victimized by the applicant on those photographs/ videos and used to threaten her by demonstrating his gun. Rest of the statement is almost repetition of her earlier statement made under section 161 Cr.P.C. In the statement of the concerned Hotel Manager it has come into light that the applicant, accompanied with the victim, had booked his hotel room for two hours.
All the aforesaid facts cumulatively establish that the alleged victim is not at all consenting party and the applicant had outraged his modesty against her wish and desire because as per her allegation after black mailing her or taking her consent through certain coercive methods. By no imagination it can be said that she was a consenting party for establishing sexual relationship with the applicant.
It has next been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the supplementary medical report, dated 03.11.2017 the concerned doctor opined that no comment could be given on any forceful activities and no external or internal injury was found on the person of the alleged victim, therefore, the applicant is innocent and is liable to be released on bail.
Keeping in view the severity of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, entire facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court declines to grant any relief to the accused applicant.
The application for bail is, accordingly, rejected.
However, the trial court is expected to gear up the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same expeditiously in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial.
Office is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the court concerned within a fortnight.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 shailesh