Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant involved in Case Crime No.76 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.Lalpur, District Varanasi with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
According to prosecution version, on 5.08.2020 while the victim girl, aged 15 years, was at her maternal uncle's home, she has gone missing and on the next day, one relative of first informant namely Mazid Hashami has made a phone call to the informant and stated that his daughter was with them and if informant did not marry his daughter with Zamal (applicant), he would kill them. On the same night, victim girl returned to her home and she has told that she was forcibly taken away by applicant, Golu and two other co-accused persons to the house of applicant and there applicant has committed rape upon her and threatened that if she did not marry with him, he would kill her.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The first information report has been lodged after four days of alleged incident. The date of birth of prosecutrix is shown 13.07.2004 but victim has shown her age less and she has given wrong statement about her age. It was submitted that in fact victim was a consenting party and in this connection, learned counsel has referred certain photographs, which are annexed as Annuxure-6 to this bail application. It was further submitted that victim is a major girl and that she has made false allegation of kidnapping and rape against applicant under pressure of her family members. It was further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2020 having no criminal history and that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in the trial.
Learned counsel for the first informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the age of victim girl is about 16 years and that in her statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she has clearly stated that she was forcibly kidnapped by the applicant and other co-accused persons at the point of gun and she was taken to the house of applicant and there applicant has committed rape upon her and that applicant and his family members have pressurized her to marry with applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant Jamal Hashmi is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 17.8.2021 Neeraj