Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29528 of 2021 Applicant :- Deva Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Roshan Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard leaned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material brought on record. However no one has appeared on behalf of the first informant despite service of notice.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 371/2020 (S.T. No. 504/2020), under Section 377 IPC and under Sections 3/4, 5D/6 of POCSO Act, police station Dhaulana, District Hapur with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. Learned counsel has referred statements of victim boy, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., and submitted that there are material contradictions in the statements of victim. It was pointed out that in his statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim has stated that on 01.09.2020 while he was returning from nursery, applicant has met him and did bad act with him, whereas in his statement, recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., he has stated that on 01.09.2020 when he was going to his home, applicant has caught him and he raised an alarm but he has put cloth in his mouth and thereafter he molested him in the sugarcane field. It was further submitted that in medical examination report of victim, no injury has been shown on the body of victim and thus his allegation is not supported by medical evidence. It was further argued that the applicant was falsely implicated in this case due to panchayat election enmity and he is in judicial custody since 03.09.2020 and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that victim is a ten years old boy and in his statements, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., he has clearly stated that applicant has caught him and he committed carnal intercourse against him.
After considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, looking into the seriousness of the allegations, gravity of the offence, severity of punishment and considering all attending facts and circumstances of the case, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant Deva is rejected.
However, keeping in view the period of detention of the applicant, Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same expeditiously, as early as possible from the date of production of a copy of this order.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned court below for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 26.10.2021 Anand