Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56759 of 2019 Applicant :- Saddam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Dileep Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant; as well as Sri Ankit Shrivastav, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Saddam with a prayer to release him on bail in S.S.T. No.91 of 2019, Case Crime No. -223 of 2019, under Sections -354 & 307 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station - Gursahaiganj, District - Kannauj, during pendency of trial.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of offence of molestation and attempt to murder, punishable with imprisonment upto life;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 02.05.2019, the applicant is in confinement since 19.08.2019;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. However, there is a gap of more than three months before the applicant came to be apprehended;
(iv) the applicant has no criminal history;
(v) chargesheet has already been submitted yet there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial;
(vi) on prima facie basis, only for purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted that FIR allegation are plainly false, inasmuch as the FIR was lodged with a delay of three days. Also, reference has been made to the bed head ticket of the injured when she was admitted to the hospital. Referring to that and the patient history, as recorded on that document, it has been submitted that the victim had received burn injury in a kitchen accident and not on account of any real occurrence. Thus, it has been submitted that wholly false story has been cooked up three days after the incident, only to falsely implicate the applicant for oblique reasons;
4. The above prayer has been opposed by learned AGA, who would submit that at present, the FIR allegation and the statement recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. are specific and categorical. Further as to the injuries mentioned in the hospital documents, the mother of the victim has explained that she had made that disclosure under threat received from the present applicant. Learned AGA would further point out that the forensic lab report reveals traces of kerosene oil on the person of the victim.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in view of specific allegation existing of failed attempt to rape whereafter the victim had been assaulted by causing burn injury, only on account of her resistance, no ground of bail is made out. Bail application is rejected. Keeping in mind the fact that the allegations are serious and such crimes, if committed, need to be dealt with firmly and promptly, it is expected that the court below shall make all efforts to initiate and conclude the trial, as expeditiously as possible, without allowing for any delay either by the prosecution or the defence.
6. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected.
7. Also, in the meanwhile, it is expected that the learned court below may take up the matter with expedition both for the consideration of committal, as also, for framing of charges, if any, so that such stage of proceeding may be completed, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from today.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 S.Chaurasia