Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18732 of 2019 Applicant :- Nitin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Swetashwa Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Shahnawaz Shah Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; the learned A.G.A. for the State; Sri S.S. Shah for the informant; and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.29 of 2019, under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Brahmpuri, District Meerut with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The allegations in the first information report, which has been lodged by the victim, are to the effect that the applicant (Nitin) had been sexually exploiting the victim under false promise of marriage for the last three years and when the victim came to know that he had already entered into some other relationship, the victim tried to move away from the applicant but the applicant started blackmailing the victim by disclosing to her that if she does not succumb to his desires, then he would make viral some of her obscene videos. The allegation is to the effect that on 16th January, 2019, the victim was called by the applicant to Highfan Hotel, Meerut where he had already booked a room. In that room, the victim was sexually assaulted by the applicant. Information was given to the police by dialling 100 but the same could not be received and, therefore, a message was sent by the victim to her sister who called the police and, thereafter, the applicant was apprehended on spot by the police.
The victim was medically examined and there appear abrasion marks on her chest above the breast and some swelling was also found on or about the neck/breast region which was fresh in duration. The doctor opined that there was no sign of forceful sexual penetration but sexual assault could not be ruled out.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that, admittedly, the applicant had been in a relationship with the victim over last three years and when the victim found that the relationship was not getting converted into marriage, a trap was laid by the victim to somehow implicate and frame the applicant in the case. It has been submitted that in furtherance of that trap, room in the hotel was booked and the applicant was called there and thereafter a seen was created to trap the applicant.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the prosecution case is supported by the statement of the victim and there appears to be abrasion on breast and neck region and, therefore, it cannot be said that at least an attempt to sexually assault the victim was not made moreover injury on the private part is not necessary because from the allegations it appears that they had been in physical relationship from before but that relationship cannot be treated as a permanent consent for further physical relationship. It has been submitted that since the allegations make out a case of sexual assault and there are marks on the body of the victim and the doctor also could not rule out the possibility of sexual assault, no case for bail is made out.
I have given thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, this Court does not consider it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is rejected with a direction to the trial court concerned to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Information of this order shall be sent to the trial court concerned for compliance.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019 AKShukla/-