Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44397 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohammad Asif Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhan Dubey,Anil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chaman Aara
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Chandra Bhan Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Chaman Aara, learned counsel for the first informant, learned counsel 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 Mohammad Asif, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.382 of 2021, under Sections 452, 376-Ka, 376 Kha, 354-Ka, 354-Kha, 107 I.P.C. and Under Section 5-M/6, 16/17 Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, registered at P.S.- Bahedi, District- Bareilly.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. it is argued that incident in question is of 23.04.2021 for which F.I.R. has been lodged after about two months on 21.06.2021. It is argued that although in the First Information Report, age of the prosecuterix is stated to be 12 years but as per medical examination conducted by Doctor her age has been opined to be 18 years. It is argued that as such, prosecutrix is a major. She was produced before the Doctor but he did not find any external or internal injury on her body. It is argued that implication of the applicant in the present case is false and with mala-fide intentions. It is next submitted that prosecutrix and younger brother of the applicant namely, Khalid were in love in each other and they used to talk on mobile phone. It is argued that co-accused Shafiq was granted bail by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the prosecution relied upon certificate of the School with regards to the date of birth of the prosecuterix but the same is manipulated and fabricated certificate. It is argued the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.09.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant is named in the First Information Report and in the statement recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix there is an allegation of rape against him. It is argued that as per the School records, date of birth of the prosecutrix is 06.08.2009 and the incident in question is of 23.04.2021, as such, she was aged about 12 years at the time of incident. It is argued that prosecutrix was a minor at the time of the incident.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that applicant is named in the F.I.R. and statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. is also against the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, the nature and gravity of the accusation, I find no good ground for grant of bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Sachin/-
(Samit Gopal,J.)