Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43828 of 2018 Applicant :- Naim Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikram Shah Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Naim Singh in connection with Case Crime No. 903 of 2018 under Section 363, 370, 342, 376D, 323, 506 IPC, Section 5/6, 17 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 26 Juvenile Justice Act, P.S. Loni, District Ghaziabad.
Heard Sri V.S. Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sudhir Kumar Pathak, learned AGA along with Sri Ashutosh Diljan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is the father-in-law of the prosecutrix, where the allegation is that the prosecutrix's mother arranged a marriage for the prosecutrix amongst her relatives, of whom the applicant is one. It is submitted that there is a matrimonial discord between the mother and the father of the prosecutrix, and, therefore, this matrimony was not palatable to the prosecutrix's father. It is submitted that on this account, the father of the prosecutrix lodged an FIR alleging commission of rape and other offences against his daughter’s in-laws, including her husband and the father-in-law, the applicant. The prosecution case is supported by the prosecutrix in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. But in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. though the prosecutrix has expressed her disgruntlement about her marriage facilitated by her mother, maternal grand- father, maternal grand-mother and Mausi, and as also her indignation against her husband and the father-in-law, saying that they are very illmannered, and, would make her do all household chores. There is no allegation of rape that finds place in the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the allegation of rape is patently false, and is the fall out of a long estrangement between the prosecutrix's father and mother, where the father has falsely implicated the prosecutrix's in-laws, with whom the prosecutrix was too not happy. It is further pointed out that there are no telltale signs of injury, or other evidence, supporting a case of gang rape as alleged by the prosecutrix's father, by the in-laws.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the fact that the applicant is prosecutrix's father-in- law, the marriage has been settled by the prosecutrix's mother, who is an estranged wife of the prosecutrix's father, the fact that there has been small matrimonial bickering between the prosecutrix and her in-laws, the fact that the FIR has been lodged by the father who was on the look out of an opportunity to implicate her daughter's in-laws, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Naim Singh involved in Case Crime No. 903 of 2018 under Section 363, 370, 342, 376D, 323, 506 IPC, Section 5/6, 17 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 26 Juvenile Justice Act, P.S. Loni, District Ghaziabad be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 19.12.2018 Deepak