Heard over bail application moved by accused-applicant, Naresh Lodhe @ Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Lodhe Rajput, in Case Crime No. 455 of 2020, under Sections 363, 376 (3), 506 IPC, Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 3 2) (v) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Gajraula, District Pilibhit.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 30.12.2020; he is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., are at quite variance; the contention in first information report is also of other way; the admission under section 161 Cr.P.C., is of previous acquaintance; it is a false implication. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed with this contention that prosecutrix is minor; as per education record, her date of birth is 15.3.2006 and on the date of occurrence on 26.12.2020, she was less than 15 years; the same age has been given in first information report too; it is corroborated by medical evidence recorded by medical board, which gives the age from 13-15 years; prosecutrix in her statement under Sections 161 as well as 164 of Cr.P.C., has said to have been taken by applicant and sexually assaulted by applicant; the occurrence is having supported by medical evidence, wherein fresh torn hymen with 3-4 tears is there; the situation of sexually assault is narrated in medical report; prosecutrix being minor girl, less than 15 years of age, belonging to scheduled caste community, a vulnerable society, was taken by applicant, enticed and forcibly raped; there is every likelihood fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail.
Even after sufficient service of notice, none turned up on behalf of the informant to oppose the bail application.
Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through materials on record, it is apparent that prosecutrix is a minor girl of less than 15 years of age; she was subjected to sexually assault and was supported by medical evidence.
Looking to the heinousness of offence of rape with a tiny girl of vulnerable poor family, aim and object of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 to protect children from sexual offence, likelihood of tampering with evidence in case of release on bail as well as likelihood of fleeing from course of justice, but without commenting on merits of the case, there appears to be no ground for bail.
Accordingly, this Bail Application stands rejected.
Order Date :- 19.8.2021 Ravi Prakash