Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36298 of 2016 Applicant :- Pintu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Singh,Gaurav Singh,Sanjeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
Heard Shri Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.S. Tiwari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 138 of 2016, under Sections 376 IPC, 3/4 and 5/6 of POCSO Act, PS Khoda, district Ghaziabad, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some monetary dispute between the applicant and the informant. It is further submitted that FIR of the incident dated 24.3.2016 was lodged on 29.3.2016 for which no plausible explanation has been tendered by the prosecution. It is also submitted that there is no injury on the private part of the victim. It is submitted that allegations made in the FIR are false, concocted and fabricated and in fact no such incident took place. It is next argued that there is no evidence against the applicant and the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The applicant has been in jail since 30.3.2016 and in case he is released on bail, he shall cooperate with the trial.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is six years old innocent girl and the applicant is her maternal uncle. He further submitted that the applicant has inserted finger on the private part of the victim. Learned AGA also submits that though there is no injury on the private part of the victim, but the offence of rape or attempt to commit rape is legal conclusion and not medical one and that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. On the issue of lodging FIR with considerable delay, it was contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate that it was common knowledge and also judicially noted fact that incident like rape, more so, when the perpetrator of the crime happens to be a related therewith, involve the honour of the family of the victim to report the matter to the police and carry the same to the Court, a cool thought may proceed lodging of the FIR. Delay in such case is not fatal. It was also contended by the learned A.G.A. that period of detention of the applicant is also not so prolonged which by itself may be made the basis for release him on bail on the ground of long detention.
In this case I find that a heinous crime has been committed with a six years old girl and the accused, who is her maternal uncle and the accused must suffer for its consequences. A rapist not only violates the victim's personal integrity, but leaves indelible marks on the very soul of the helpless female. In this case, a hapless girl had been ravished by the accused, who must have undergone a traumatic experience. As a matter of fact the crime is not only against the victim, it is against the whole society as well.
Having considered the submissions of the parties, nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
The bail application is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Ishrat