Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24328 of 2019 Applicant :- Kamlapat Rai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Singh,Swati Agrawal Srivastava
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Ashwini Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA for the State.
Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court dated 30.07.2019 pleadings between the parties have been exchanged and the matter has ripe for final arguments.
After hearing the contesting parties at length.
Sri Ashwini Kuma Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case by non other than the informant Smt. Yogita Tripathi, who is a married woman, lodged an FIR on 06.08.2018 at 16.30 hours for the incident said to have been taken place on 05.08.2018 at 18.30 hours.
The text of the FIR, so lodged by the victim herself, who is a informant, that she is a poor lady and resident of Orchha, District Teekamgarh, M.P. came to Mata Mandi at Baruasagar, Jhansi to pay her tribute. After performing the usual rituals, she was waiting for coveyance at Bus Stand around 6.30 in the evening. Her old acquaintance Kamlapal Rai, the preset applicant came on his white car and offered her that he would drop her to Orchha. Keeping in view her old acquaintance she occupied rear seat of the car with no expectation in her wildest dream that the applicant would ravish her. Instead of proceeding to Orchha he has taken turn to Jhansi and when objected he parked car in an abandoned place and started misbehaving with her and thereafter driven by sexual lust, has outraged her modesty mercilessly after over powering her. Thereafter any how she has able to come out from his clutches after pushing him and was rescued by two persons, namely, Arvind and Satish. Since she was horrified by the conduct of the applicant and wants to reach at her place at Orchha as early as possible, they have managed to provide Appe (vehicle) and then she reached to her place and narrated the entire story to her husband. Thereafter on 06.08.2018 around 16.30 hours, the FIR was got registered at police station Baruasagar, Jhansi under Section 376 IPC against the present applicant.
After lodging of FIR her statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 06.08.2018 itself whereby she has reiterated the entire version of the FIR annexed as Annexure-2 of the bail application. Thereafter she was produced for her Medico Legal Examination on 07.08.2018 at 4.30 p.m. and as per medical report her age comes around 36 years of married woman. She in her statement before the doctor broadly, has reiterated the same version as in the FIR.
I have perused the medical report and it is evident that her perineum was torn but old and healed, which is quite natural for a married woman. Though there is no mark of injury on the external persons of the victim. On 08.08.2018 her 164 Cr.P.C. statement was recorded whereby she has broadly reiterated the version of the FIR. This is indicative of the fact that she at no point of time have given consent for this act. She was a poor victim of the sexual urge of the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has tried to impress upon certain insignificant discrepancies with regard to the timings. Sri Satish Kumar and Arvind Kumar, the alleged witnesses in their respective affidavits also supported the prosecution case.
Learned counsel for the applicant has tried to assail the prosecution story on the ground that she is puppet in the hand of one Mehar Singh Yadav, a political rival of the applicant. Besides this learned counsel for the applcant has drawn the attention of the Court to numbers of affidavits of acquaitance of the applicants and annexed as Annexure-10 to the application. Though none of the affidavits are part of the case diary. It is also contended by the counsel that after having a lop side investigation, the police has submitted a charge sheet against the applicant on 24.09.2018. It is contended by the counsel that presently the applicant is a Parshad in Nagar Palika Parishad in Baruasagar for last more than 20 years and his wife is a village Pradhan and his son is a Director of Beej Samiti Katra Baruasagar.
Per contra Sri Pramod Kumar Singh has filed his counter affidavit denying each and every allegation in the affidavit and while putting the record straight, it was revealed that the applicant has got a chequered past of as many as 28 cases to his credit and not only this there is a history sheet no. 26/A in the name of Kamlapat Rai @ Gundey Rai, he is ill famed person of the locality, primarily a mussleman and a rogue to the society at large.
In the rejoinder affidavit learned counsel for the applicant has tried to mitigate the gravity of the offence by explaining history sheet but ha only succeeded to fewer in number.
Fact remains that a married woman was ravished by none other than the person to whom she was having previous acquaintance and betraying her confidence, she was back stabbed and ravished by the applicant. The applicant who after having star studded criminal antecedent has mis-utilizing the loneliness and outrage her modesty.
Learned counsel for the complainant has drawn the attention of the Court whereby after filing of the charge sheet, the applicant challenged the same by means of Crl. Misc. Application No. 39772 of 2018 and the coordinate Bench of this Court on 12.11.2018 has granted time to surrendered and get himself bailed out. but the unscrupulous applicant brushed aside the directions of the Court has filed yet another Crl. Misc. Application No. 11168 of 2019 and when the Court has recorded his strongest concerned and anguish vide order dated 27.05.2019 after great deal and effort, he has surrendered before the Court and after getting his bail application rejected on 04.06.2019 approached this Court by means of the instant criminal application.
On these facts goes to show that the applicant is a habitual law offender who take the process of law for his joyride and in the instant case, if he is released on bail, he would necessarily temper the evidence terrorize the informant and would not permit the trial to go in a smooth way. Thus taking into account and the totality of the circumstances the role of the applicant, the statements of the victim, his previous conduct and a criminal history of 28 cases coupled with the fact of history sheet, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary power in favour of the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and the bail application is hereby rejected.
The trial court is expected to gear up the trial and would see that no untoward incident took place in the smooth sail of trial within a period of one year from the date production of certified copy of this order. Learned Sessions Judge is expected to have a close vigil that the applicant shall not be permitted to play or handle the evidence.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 Abhishek Sri.