Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Raju Yadav @ Shashi Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 January, 2010

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned Additional Government Advocate, perused the F.I.R., the medical report and other relevant papers on record.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that earlier the accused-applicant was granted bail under section 363/366 IPC vide Crl. Misc. Case No.668(B) of 2008 by the order dated 25.11.2008. It is submitted that earlier there was no allegation of rape against the accused-applicant. According to the medical report the girl was about 18 years of age and no opinion regarding rape could be given. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that during trial in statement of the prosecutrix in court, she has changed the story and has alleged that the accused-applicant had indulged in sexual intercourse against her wishes, when she was with the applicant at Bombay. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she went to Bombay on her own sweet will. It is also stated therein that she was in love with the accused-applicant and the accused-applicant did not threaten her. It is further stated in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. that she married with accused-applicant(court marriage) before Notary in January and she did not want to implicate the accused-applicant. She also sated that she wanted to live as wife of accused-applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that in the trial court, the statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded and she has changed the story and has alleged that the accused-applicant committed rape on her. This changed version of the prosecutrix creates doubt on the prosecution case and it seems that the prosecutrix had changed her version in the court in duress or on being tutored by his father and other members of the family. The applicant is in jail since 19.11.2009, as averred in para 9 of the application.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I direct that the applicant be released on bail in case Crime No.590/2008 u/s 363/366/376 IPC P.S.Bighapur District Unnao on his filing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/remand Magistrate.
Order Date :- 21.1.2010 kvg/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Raju Yadav @ Shashi Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 January, 2010