JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh, J.
1. Heard Sri I.M. Khan, learned counsel for the applicants sand the learned A.G.A.
2. The applicants have applied for bail in Case Crime No. 145 of 2005 under Sections 452, 354, 509, 323, 506, 376, 342/34 and 504 I.P.C. P.S. Kotwali District Rampur.
3. From the perusal of the record, it appears that in the present case, the F.I.R. was lodged by one Sunil at Police Station Kotwali on 22.4.2005 at 10.15 A.M. In respect of an incident which had occurred on 22.4.2005 at 9.30 A.M.. Initially the F.I.R. was lodged under Section 452, 354, 323 and 506 I.P.C. but subsequently , the offence was punishable under Sections 376, 342/34 and 504 I.P.C. were also added.
4. According to the F.I.R. version, the applicants and two other co-accused namely Kamal and Mathuri Prasad came at the house of the first informant and by force, they have taken away to the prosecutrix Km. Poonam, the niece of the first informant at about 9.30 A.M. The prosecutrix and her uncle Sunil, his wife Rani and one Sundari had came to their house after performing the Pooja in a temple. As soon as they entered their house, the applicants and other co-accused persons who were armed with country made pistol entered the house of the first informant and by force took away to the prosecutrix and for insult and the outrage her modesty. She was taken in a room where her clothes were torn and she became nacked. At the souting of the prosecutrix and her uncle and ant, the persons living in the same locality came at the place of occurrence and any how, the prosecutrix could be released from clutches of the applicants and other co-accused . The applicants and other co-accused persons had caused the injury on the person of Smt. Rani and Smt. Uma, the ants of the prosecturix by using the butts blows of the country made pistol. Consequently, the atmosphere of terror and fear was created in that locality. The F.I.R. was lodged by the first informant thereafter. The distance of the police station was of 3 kms. from the alleged place of occurrence. During the investigation, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded. She supported the F.I.R. version and in addition, she made the allegation that she was lifted by the applicant Subhash and taken into room where she was illegally detained, where she was raped by the applicants. The other co-accused Kamal and Mathuri Prasad remained out side the door and when the protest was made by the family members of the prosecutrix , they were beaten by the Butts of the country made pistols by co-accused Kamal and Mathuri Prasad and when the people of the locality developed the pressure . The prosecutrix was kicked out by the applicants in a naked condition, then some other persons covered her body by the cloths. The prosecutrix was medically examined on 22.4.2005 at 1.45 P.M. Abrasion was found over the front of right knee joint. On the same date, Smt. Uma and Smt. Rani Devi were also medically examined. The Medical Examination Report of Smt. Uma shows that she had received two injuries in which injury No. 1 was Abrasion on the Front of right knee joint and injury No. 2 was right 1st Incisor tooth of upper jaw was loosed in its socket and fresh bleeding around the margin was present, hence, Smt. Rani Devi received on injury that was abrasion on the left elevicle.
5. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. She supported the prosecution version and made the allegation against the applicants that they committed rape with her at the pistol point, after illegally confining her in a room. A detailed medical report of the prosecutrix shows that no mark of injury was seen on the private part but the redness was present at the posterior aspect of entrance of vagina. The vagina admits one fingers and tenderness was present and the age of the prosecutrix was above 19 years and no definite opinion about rape could be given.
6. It is contended by the counsel for the applicants that in the present case, the F.I.R. was not lodged under Section 376 and 342 I.P.C. but subsequently a material improvement was made in the statement of the prosecutrix in which the allegation of rape was made by alleging that she was illegally detained in the room where the rape was committed by them.
7. It is further contended that the allegation of gang rape is absolutely false and it is not supported by any medical evidence because no injury on the private part of the prosecutrix was found. Even no spermatozoa was seen in the vaginal smear and the case of simple Marpith was given a colour of alleged commission of rape.
8. It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. by submitting that the prosecutrix is an unmarried girl . . The applicants and other co-accused persons had taken away to her at the pistol point in the presence of the first informant and others. She was kept in a room where they committed rape with her. Her cloths were torn and she was made naked and in a naked condition, she was kicked out from the room. When the aunt of the prosecutrix made a protest they were also beaten by Butts of the country made pistols. The F.I.R. was not properly lodged , which was lodged by the uncle of the prosecutrix that is why all detailed could not be mentioned in the F.I.R. but subsequently, the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has given the detailed version. The applicants are the main accused and the prosecution story is fully corroborated by the medical evidence because the redness was present at the entrance of vagina and the tenderness was also present and the manner in which the offence was committed was very serious which created the panic in the society.
9. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail at this stage.
10. Accordingly this bail application is rejected .