1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Bablu Shukla @ Rakesh Kumar Shukla vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 July, 2010


Heard Sri Mridul Rakesh, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Santosh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA and perused the record.
The learned senior counsel submitted that according to the initial report lodged by the husband of the victim as well as the statement made by him before the Police, the victim was of unsound mind/mentally retarded. It was next submitted that the husband himself informed the Police on 09.01.2010 that his wife herself returned on 07.01.2010 till then no complaint was made against the applicant and other accused. The learned senior counsel further submitted that any time thereafter the prosecutrix moved a detailed report without any date to the Circle Officer, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow stating therein that the applicant and the other accused, took her in a car to different places which she could not locate and thereafter she managed her escape from their clutches and returned back. It was next submitted that the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code") and also under section 164 of the Code, seem to be tutored and concocted, in view of the fact that the prosecutrix was a mentally retarded lady and was thus not in a position to give such accurate statements before the Police and the Magistrate as well. It was next submitted that no allegation of rape or abduction for the purpose of rape has been made by the prosecutrix in both of her statements except that she noticed that her clothes were wet when she had gone to attend the call of nature and on the basis of this, she stated that there was possibility of rape on her. The learned senior counsel next contended that the instant case has been concocted merely to harass the applicant and the other accused on the ground that a quarrel had taken place prior to the instant incident. The prosecutrix is habitual of trapping innocent persons. In the year 2005 too, the prosecutrix had lodged Crime No. 39 of 2005, under sections 376, 511, 509 and 506 IPC, P.S. Aliganj, District Lucknow against some innocent persons.
There does not appear to be any reasonable ground to believe that the applicant will tamper with the witnesses or abscond, if released on bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the applicant, the severity of the punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Bablu Shukla alias Rakesh Kumar Shukla involved in Crime No. 16 of 2010, under sections 364, 376 and 392 IPC, P.s. Aliganj, District Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
Order Date :- 30.7.2010 shailesh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Bablu Shukla @ Rakesh Kumar Shukla vs State Of U.P.


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

30 July, 2010