Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31907 of 2021 Applicant :- Hakim @ Suraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar,Maohammd Nadeem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over this bail application, moved by the applicant, Hakim @ Suraj, in Case Crime No.197 of 2021, under Sections 452, 376, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tirwa, District Kannauj.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 13.05.2021. It is submitted that there was a dispute with regard to money in between because of which this case crime was got registered for offence under Sections 452, 354, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act. Subsequently it was developed for offence of rape.
The contention of the prosecutrix under Section 161 CrPC as well as under Section 164 CrPC is with material change, no occurrence like it ever happens; it is a false implication; there is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence, in case of release of bail; hence bail has been prayed for.
Learned learned AGA has vehemently opposed with this contention that instant report was got lodged wherein statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 CrPC as well as Section 164 CrPC is fully intact with regard to commission of rape with her by the applicant. The applicant happens to be of the same locality and his identity is also not in dispute. The statement before the medical office is also of offence of rape committed by the applicant; prosecutrix has been held to be of 14 years in age determination by the medical board though she is said to be 13 years in the First Information Report; it is offence of rape of a 14 years' minor girl. Hence, there is other likelihood of tampering with the evidence, in case he has been released on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, gone through the material placed on record it is apparent that the prosecutrix is a minor held to be of 14 years. She in her statement under Section 161 as well as Section 164 CrPC has reiterated offence of rape committed by the applicant.
Considering all those facts and circumstances of the case; heinousness of offence, purpose for special legislation of POCSO Act but without commenting on merit of the case, there appears to be no ground for bail.
Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 Shahroz