Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3861 of 2021 Applicant :- Govinda Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pravin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over bail application moved by applicant, Govinda, in Case Crime No. 254 of 2020, under Sections- 376-D, 506 I.P.C. & 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Nawabganj, District- Farrukhabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 27.8.2020; he is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; prosecutrix has been said to be of 14 years in FIR whereas, in her statement, she has said herself to be of 14 to 15 years of age. In medical report, there is no proof of rape, however, it has been said that possibility may not be ruled out but the medical support of alleged rape is not there; in statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. as well as in FIR, the commission of rape by present applicant and Kishan was said to be present thereat. Bail to Kishan has been granted by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14533 of 2021, vide order dated 27.7.2021, whereas, in statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., gang rape by both accused is there; it is a false implication. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed with this contention that prosecutrix is of date of birth of year 2008 according to which, she was of 13 years on the date of occurrence; as there was school record with regard to date of birth, hence, medical age is of no avail.
Having heard learned counsels for both sides and gone through materials placed on record, it is apparent that it was an instant report, wherein, rape was said to be committed by applicant. Prosecutrix was said to be of 14 years. Prosecutrix was taken for her medical examination, wherein, the same repetition is there. The same contention is there in statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Bail to co-accused has been given with specific mention of accusation of rape against applicant. Prosecutrix, who was under trauma and was 12/13/14 years of age, has instantly reported about this occurrence.
Under all above facts and circumstances and considering the heinousness of offence of rape, vulnerability of poor victim, likelihood of tampering of evidence, in case of release on bail as well as fleeing from course of justice but without commenting on the merit of case, no ground for bail is there.
Rejected, accordingly.
Order Date :- 16.8.2021 Kamarjahan