Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3950 of 2021 Applicant :- Mustqueem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jagdish Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the accused-applicant, Mustqueem, who is involved in Sessions Trial No. 381 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 292 of 2016, under Section 376 IPC, police station Kandhla, district Shamli.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case accused-applicant, Mustqueem, who is step father of the victim Praveen (since deceased), had lodged the first information report of this case on 12.6.2016 in respect of an incident which took took place on 10.6.2016 against the three accused persons, namely, Ishaq, Matloob and Manjoora for the offence under Sections 363 and 366 IPC with the allegation that on 10.6.2016 at about 3.00 PM his daughter aged about 16 years was enticed away by the aforesaid accused persons for the purpose of her forcible marriage. It is pointed out that victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has made serious allegation of rape against the present applicant, who is her step father. On the basis of the statement of the victim, applicant, Mustqueem who is informant of this case, during investigation has been made accused of this case. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the accused applicant that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case and victim has given a false statements against the present applicant under the pressure of accused-persons. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that after submission of charge sheet, victim died on 27.8.2018 in the house of accused Ishaq. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that since victim has died in the house of accused, Ishaq, therefore no offence is made out against the present accused applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 1.2.2017 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail by contending that in this case charge sheet was submitted on 17.2.2017 and on the said date victim was alive and there is serious allegations of rape against the applicant in the statements of the victim. It is also pointed out by learned A.G.A. that victim was medically examined on 13.6.2016 and at that time she had also given statement before the doctor, in which also she had made allegation of rape against her step father/accused-applicant, hence no case for any indulgence is made out. It is again submitted by learned A.G.A. that the trial is proceeding in this case and two prosecution witnesses have already been examined on 2.1.2019 and 18.1.2019.
Having heard the argument of learned counsel for the parties, I find that victim was alive at the time of submission of charge sheet and it is a rare case, where victim who is aged about 16 years, has made allegation of rape against her step father for the offence of rape.The statement of victim is of primary consideration in the matter of rape. There is no material on record to presume the false implication of the applicant at this stage. It is an admitted fact that trial is proceeding, hence, without recording any finding on merit, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail.
The application for bail is hereby rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 20.9.2021 Sumaira