Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Sajji Lal vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 March, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33095 of 2016 Applicant :- Sajji Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Sharma,Gaurav Kakkar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Counter affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 161/2016 under Sections 376 IPC PS Karari District Kaushambi with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the FIR and also the bail rejection order. I have also perused the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., contents of which are self explicit.
Accused-applicant has been named in the FIR and a specific role has also been assigned to him. Medical examination report shows that the hymen is raptured.
After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and after perusing the averments as contained in the present bail application and also looking to the seriousness of the allegations as made in the FIR, gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment, no case for grant of any indulgence is made out.
Accordingly, the application for bail is rejected, at this stage.
However, looking to the period of detention of the applicant, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the court below be decided expeditiously, as early as possible on day to day basis in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and also in view of principle as has been laid down in the recent judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220.
It is made clear that in case, the witnesses are not appearing before the court concerned, liberty is being given to the concerned court to take necessary coercive measures in accordance with law for ensuring the presence of the witnesses.
Office is directed to forward a copy of this order to the concerned court below for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 Anand
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

Sajji Lal vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 March, 2018
Judges
  • Vipin Sinha
Advocates
  • Ravindra Sharma Gaurav Kakkar