Heard Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri U. P. Singh, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Manvendra @ Pintoo Mistri, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 96 of 2021, under Sections 376, 452 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Gandhi Park, District Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the victim is a married lady aged about 28 years as per opinion of Chief Medical Officer, Aligarh and she was married three times earlier. It is argued that although there is an allegation of rape against the applicant but the same is false and incorrect as the same does not get any corroboration from the medical evidence. Learned counsel has placed para-12 and 14 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application and has argued that the applicant and the first informant were tenants in the house and there was an amount of Rs.16,058/- due on the first informant as he was doing business of confectionery which was not being returned by the first informant and as such he got the applicant falsely implicated in the present case.
It is argued that even there was some dispute with regard to the payment of electricity dues as the electricity bill was being paid by the applicant for the first informant also. It is argued that as such implication of the applicant in the present case is false. The applicant is in jail since 13.2.2021 having no criminal history as stated in para-36 of the affidavit.
Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. which has been registered by the brother of the victim and even in the statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim there is an allegation of committing rape upon the victim by the applicant. It is argued that the first informant himself has stated that the victim was a lady of weak mind. The said fact has been stated by the first informant in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is argued that the applicant has committed rape upon a lady which has a weak mental faculty and the case of the prosecution is consistent in so far as rape committed by the applicant is concerned.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the F.IR. and in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. His naming is consistent and he has been assigned the role of committing rape upon the victim girl who has some mental disability.
Looking to fact and circumstances of the case, nature of evidence and gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 25.8.2021 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.)