Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28790 of 2021 Applicant :- Arvind Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharm Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Dharm Singh Paramar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri U.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Arvind Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.62 of 2021, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Muskara, District Hamirpur.
Notice was issued to opposite party no.2 vide order dated 06.08.2021. As per office report dated 28.09.2021, report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur has been received which has been perused by the Court. From the perusal of the said report dated 01.09.2021 of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur, it is apparent that the notice has been served personally to opposite party no.2 but no one appears on behalf of opposite party no.2.
The prosecution case as per FIR lodged on 28.03.2021 by the first informant Jairam Yadav naming the applicant and Smt. Sadhna, the wife of the applicant is that the sister of the first informant aged about 17 years was taken by the applicant and his wife for doing work in the field where at about 3 p.m., the applicant with the help of his wife committed rape upon the prosecutrix. Both the accused have threatened her of dire consequences. The prosecutrix then came to the house at 6 p.m. and informed him the entire incident. Thus the present FIR is lodged.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the entire prosecution case is a false case. No such incident took place. The prosecutrix is a mentally retarded girl. The statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. are tutored statements just for the purposes of false implication of the applicant. It is argued that the prosecution story as narrated is completely improbable as the wife of the applicant stated to have helped the applicant in committing rape which is an improbable situation. It is argued that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of malafide intentions. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 30.03.2021.
Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the prosecutrix is a minor girl aged about 16 years as per the school records. She has stated in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. that the applicant committed rape on her. There is an allegation against the applicant of committing rape on the prosecutrix.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the applicant is named in the FIR, in statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. and there is allegation of committing rape on the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix is a minor girl aged about 16 years as per the school records.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 30.9.2021 Gaurav