Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34806 of 2018 Applicant :- Chuttan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kukmar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Santosh Kukmar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the statement of prosecutrix recorded u/s. 164 Cr.P.C, she is a consenting party.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that though learned counsel for the applicant has argued that it was a case of consent but there appears to be no such averment made in the present bail application. Hence, the said argument has no substance. He further submits that as per the statement recorded u/s. 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has levelled allegation of rape against the applicant.
After perusing the entire bail application, the contention made by learned counsel for the applicant that it is a case of consent is not found mention anywhere.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, I find no good ground for grant of bail to the applicant Chuttan involved in Case Crime No.295 of 2018 under Section 376, 506 I.P.C. and sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, police station Kanth, District Shahjahanpur.
Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 14.9.2018 Madhurima