Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45416 of 2017 Applicant :- Pushpendra Raikwar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to property dispute over mutual partition amongst co-sharers; that the applicant happens to be cousin brother of first informant; that as per averments made in F.I.R. 28 years old wife of first informant was grazing her cow at the drain of the village when applicant allegedly caught hold of her, thrown her on the ground and committed rape on her, and on the alarm raised by the prosecutrix her husband, the first informant reached at the spot upon which the applicant allegedly fled away; that in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix has repeated the same version of F.I.R., but her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is contradictory, where she has stated that the applicant apart from committing rape abused and committed marpeet with her and at the time of incident her husband had gone to Bethwa river for filling tractor and she herself made a complaint at the home of applicant; that the entire prosecution story is baseless, false and concocted and highly improbable and in fact the incident in question did never take place; that the applicant is young boy of 22 years and neither caught hold of the prosecutrix nor dragged her to the drain nor thrown her on the ground nor committed rape or marpeet on her; that there are material contradictions in the statements of prosecutrix under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C; that the medical examination report does not support the prosecution case and committal of rape with her; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 2.4.2017.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Pushpendra Raikwar be released on bail in Case Crime No.33 of 2017, under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C, P.S. Barua Sagar, District Jhansi, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 28.11.2017 VS