Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27828 of 2018 Applicant :- Harish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla, Akhileshwar Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.291 of 2015, u/s 452, 342, 376(2)(d), 506 I.P.C. and Section ¾ of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Ughaitee, District-Budaun.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
Counsel for the applicant has tried to argue that it was a case of consent and it was only when the act of coitus was discovered by some family member that things came to be uncovered and the F.I.R. of the case has been lodged. It has been submitted that as a cousin brother had seen the incident and that is why the matter was reported.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has laid emphasis on the tender minor age of the girl. It has been shown that the victim was of about 10 years in age and even in her medical examination she was found to be of about 12 years in age. Submission is that in such view of the matter, the plea of the defence of her being a consenting party is absolutely meaningless because it shall still be a rank rape committed upon a minor. Learned A.G.A. has contended that the victim girl was too young to know the implications of the act. According to her statement given before the Magistrate, the three accused persons which included the applicant had done the wrong thing on her (implying rape) and this act was committed in the house of Harish applicant himself. When accused were trying to whisk her away in the arms, the cousin brother of the victim had seen and heard the hue and cry and who also called up the father of the victim. It has been categorically alleged by the victim girl that all three accused persons committed this blasphemy upon her while applicant Harish had also slapped her indicating the element of coercion exercised upon this minor girl. Submission is that no liberal view should be taken in such matters.
Looking to the nature of offence, its gravity and the evidence in support of it and the overall circumstances of this case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the applicant is rejected.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 30.7.2018 M. Kumar