Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41864 of 2018 Applicant :- Ravi Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Balram Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Ravi Kumar in connection with Case Crime No. 273 of 2018 under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar.
Heard Sri Balram Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.P. Singh Gaur, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the prosecution launched is one relating to rape, though, it is a case of consent between the parties. It is said in the FIR that the prosecutrix informed her father that she has been abducted by the applicant while she had gone to answer the call of nature and informed him that her life is in great danger. The case was registered under Section 363, 366 IPC. It is pointed out that though the FIR shows that the prosecutrix communicated the substance of the offence to her father, on the basis of which an FIR was lodged, at the same time, the FIR does not mention that she was ravished which would have been there in case that had been a fact. It is pointed out that the prosecutrix, in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded on 10.08.2018, has categorically stated that she is a major, and, is into a relationship with the applicant for past three years. She has said that on 11.07.2018 at half past 11:00 in the morning, she called the applicant over Mobile, and, asked him to take her away else she would commit suicide. It is also said that he resisted but fearing her threat of committing suicide, the applicant took the prosecutrix by a Tempo to Halilabad and thence to Basti. The two proceeded from Basti by train to Pune where they rented a room and live together. There, the two cohabited sexually. It is said categorically by the prosecutrix in her statement aforesaid that the applicant's father asked them to come back as the applicant's family were being harassed by the police. While on way back, the police arrested them at Viswasnathpur Chauraha and they were brought to Mahuli Police station. She has specifically said that the applicant and the prosecutrix have married at Pune in a temple.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that after the aforesaid statement recorded on 10.08.2018, the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 18.08.2018, that is to say, eight days afterwards where she did a complete volte face and accused the applicant of abducting and ravishing her. It is pointed out that going by medical estimation of age of the prosecutrix, in the medico legal report dated 14.08.2018, her age is certified to be 19 years,and, that she appears to be a major. It is, in addition, pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the supplementary medico legal report dated 18.08.2018, the prosecutrix is shown to be pregnant and the bail rejection order records that the prosecutrix is into the family way by 16 weeks, according to some medico legal report of which the learned Sessions Judge has taken note. It is argued that going by the date of the incident and the period of her pregnancy, it is apparent that the parties have been into a consensual relationship since a long time.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the stand of the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is clear and categorical. However, the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that is exculpatory made at the time of recovery is not denied.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the exculpatory statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 10.08.2018, the fact that the prosecutrix is a major and other circumstances indicative of parties being into a relationship but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Ravi Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 273 of 2018 under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 31.10.2018 Deepak