Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27859 of 2018 Applicant :- Raghuraj Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Yashpal Yadav,Lalji Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Sri Durga Prasad, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
Perused the record.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that two alleged victims-girl are actually major and their age has been wrongly shown on the lower side by the parents as is often done. When the victims-girl were taken for medical examination, they refused to get themselves medically examined. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon Annexure-4 to the application in this regard. Further submission is that though the alleged victims have subsequently tried to make allegation of rape against the applicant and other co-accused who is the applicant's cousin brother but when the victims were examined by the Medical Officer there is absolutely no allegation either against the applicant or against the co-accused's cousin. In fact, submission is that when the victim Alka was examined by the Investigating Officer it was stated by her that her mother used to ill-treat her and her sister and she used to beat and abuse the victims. Even the brothers did not intervene or save them. At some stage of her disgruntled tortured life, she and her sister Karishma decided to leave the house and they went to the house of their maternal uncle. There was a clear denial of the allegation that she or her sister was enticed away by anybody. The statement given by the victim was categorical at that stage before the Investigating Officer and it was also stated by the victim Alka that she had left her house on her own volition under the pressure of the cruel treatment which was meted out to her by her mother. It was further emphasized by the learned counsel for the applicant that though the police has shown the recovery of the victims from the house of their maternal uncle but when the victim was examined by the Magistrate she admitted at least the fact that she had gone to the house of her maternal uncle and the police had reached there and she was apprehended from the house of her maternal uncle which lends corroboration to her earlier statement given before the Investigating Officer where she had given the version to have gone straightway from her house to the house of her maternal uncle. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that in view of the complete contradictions between the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. and the complete absence of allegations made against the applicant in the statements of the victims made before the Investigating Officer, at least a prima facie case for bail is made out in favour of the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 16.10.2017 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant- Raghuraj Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 251 of 2017, u/ss 363, 366, 376D IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act, P.S.- Kurara, District- Hamirpur be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-
(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 CPP/-