Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9833 of 2021 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Roopesh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. None has appeared on behalf of first informant despite service of notice.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. The alleged incident has been shown of 20.07.2020 but F.I.R. has been lodged after five days on 25.07.2020 on the basis of statement of prosecutrix. It has been submitted that in her statement under Sections 161 Cr.P.C., victim girl has stated her age as 23 years and thus, her alleged medical age, which has been shown as 17 years, is not reliable. It has further been submitted that in the first information report, which was lodged after five days of the incident, no allegation of rape was made against the applicant and F.I.R. was registered under Sections 363, 342 and 354 IPC. It has been stated that in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has alleged that applicant has enticed her away and did Chhedkhani and bad act with her and in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that while she was going to purchase 'Atta', the applicant has forcibly dragged her into his house and committed rape upon her by showing knife and after that she was left at railway station. It was further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. In medical examination report, no injury has been shown on the body of the victim girl. It was further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 01.10.2020 having no criminal history and that in case, applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the victim is a minor girl.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Rahul involved in case crime no.670 of 2020, under Sections 363, 342, 376, 354 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Qwarsi, district Aligarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.
E. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 pks