This bail application has been filed by the applicant-Ram Prakash Sunar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in case crime No.282 of 2014, u/s 376, 511, 354 I.P.C., P.S. Bhognipur, district Kanpur Dehat.
Heard Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and A.G.A. Perused the record.
The contention of the applicant's counsel is that the allegations made against the applicant are false and frivolous and he is father of the victim-girl and had performed all his obligations towards his daughter well. The counsel has also shown the advertisement given in the news paper to find a good match for his daughter for her marriage. Further submission is that actually the first informant was having an illicit relationship with some other person which was resisted by the applicant and it was as a result of the same, that his daughter has lodged the present F.I.R. against him.
In rebuttal, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the nature of allegations and the evidence available against the accused applicant is of very grave nature, reflecting extreme depravity of his character. The applicant is the father of the first informant and the first informant has made allegations against him revealing that he is an immoral lecher having perverted lascivious instincts to the extent that he has been committing indecent sexual assaults on his own daughter for a long time. She has given her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate which also reveals that at some stage the victim girl's father stripped his daughter naked and made obscene overtures fondling with her vulnerable body parts, molesting her physically and even attempted to commit rape on her. The prosecution evidence available on record reveals the narration of the extreme depravity displayed by the applicant and also the unfortunate pitiable condition of the daughter who was subjected to coercive sexual harassment by applicant, who is none else than her own father, for a drawn out period of time. Several other details in this regard have been shown to the court as are contained in the case diary, affirming the allegations made by the daughter against applicant.
I have considered the rival arguments made at the bar and have perused the record in the light of the same. There are certain relationships which are so sacrosanct that nothing except faith and affection and complete trust signifies them. The sanctity of the relationship between father and daughter has been recognized throughout ages in all races and in all parts of the world without exception. When the debased promiscuity of an out law violates such pious relationship, the social ramifications which follow are outrageous. Such amorous delinquents become a threat to the society because they violate and disrupt the time honored social fabric of relationship which exists between men and men, and men and women. The alleged sexual crime committed by the father against her daughter is apparently a scandalous blasphemy, not to speak of the culpability of the offence or the degree and enormity of the crime which the applicant has been charged for. Innumerable girls suffer in silence when they are subjected to sexual offences for the fear of the infamy which the disclosure of such offence begets on them. It is infinitely more difficult to come out in the open against the offender when he is none else then her own father. Fear of being ostracized, the awe of being nicknamed and the apprehension of being exposed to the countless social jeers impel the victims of such outrages to cringe and shrivel, and tamely submit to their misfortune and learn to get reconciled. It is indeed upsetting to note that in this case even the mother of the victim girl could not mobilize enough courage to put any successful resistance or protest against the aforesaid sexual inroads which were being made by her husband on her own daughter. To the contrary the girl has even complained that even her mother was seen at times taking the side of the culprit.
The trial of the applicant is still to take place and this court, therefore, abstains to enter into a threadbare discussion of the details of the evidence or material collected on behalf of the prosecution, lest it might cause prejudice to either side. But suffice it to say that looking to the gravity of the charge and the nature of material evidence available on record and also in view of the over all facts and circumstances of the case, there is absolutely no ground to release the applicant on bail.
The prayer for bail of the applicant, therefore, stands rejected.
Order Date :- 14.11.2014 Rkb