Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21180 of 2018 Applicant :- Manish Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammad Samiuzzaman Khan,Mohammad Adil,Mohd Adil,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan,Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Adil & Sri Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, Advocates appearing for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.97 of 2018, under Sections 376-D, 506 IPC, 4/25 Arms Act & 66 I.T. Act, Police Station Rampur Karkhana, District Deoria, with the prayer to release him on bail.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that admittedly the prosecutrix is a married lady aged about 27 years having two children. The first information report has been lodged by the prosecutrix herself naming the applicant and two other accused persons namely Bharat Prasad and Manish Chauhan and two other unknown accused. In the first information report it is alleged that the applicant and co-accused Manish Chauhan committed rape upon her and co-accused Bharat Prasad was taking video clipping. Subsequently, the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that the three named accused as well as two unknown person had committed gang rape one by one and then they fled away. He next submitted that according to first information report, the victim was going along with his Devar Sintoo for dropping at her Maika, but he dropped her at Dudhai Pokhari and went for getting his motorcycle repaired. However, in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., Sintoo has stated that he had witnessed the commission of gang rape by the applicant and other accused. In his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., he has not named any accused. It is next contended that the allegation of gang rape has been levelled against the applicant and co-accused who are five in number but the same is not corroborated by her medical examination. Lastly, he contended that c-accused Bharat Prasad & Sandeep Yadav who is also stated to have committed rape on the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., has been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.23676 of 2018 and 21226 of 2018. Learned counsel has also placed certified copy of the written report of the prosecutrix in which certain cuttings have been made in which initially Bharat Prasad was also alleged to have raped her, however, the same was scored out and role of preparing video clipping is attributed. Learned counsel further states that in view of the aforesaid infirmities and on the ground of parity, the applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.3.2018 having no criminal antecedents.
Per contra, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail but could not dispute that co-accused Bharat Prasad & Sandeep Yadav to whom also the victim has levelled allegation of rape have been enlarged on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Manish Chauhan, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that :-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(2) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
(3) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the Courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Hasnain