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

Satish Kumar vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 August, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31303 of 2018 Applicant :- Satish Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Applicant- Satish Kumar seeks bail in Session Trial No. 74 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 266 of 2017 (Satish Vs. State of U.P.) under Sections 363, 376-D, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Gopiganj, District- Bhadohi.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown accused after ten days of the incident. The prosecution version that victim was recovered by the police on 21.07.2017 is falsified from the fact that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she came back to her home after four days of the incident. It is next contended that the facts, as the applicant and other co-accused are not named in the F.I.R., make the entire prosecution version doubtful. Thus the applicant, who is in jail since 13.11.2017, may be enlarged on bail during trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for the bail and submitted that the victim is aged about 16 years as per her high school certificate and as per medical report. She has fully corroborated the version of gang-rape against the applicant and co-accused and further in the medical examination her hymen was found torn and she has narrated to the doctor the manner in which the applicant and co-accused had raped her on the very day of her medical examination.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to consider the prayer for bail of the applicant. The prayer for bail is declined at this stage.
The application for bail is, hereby, rejected without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Vikas/-
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

Satish Kumar vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 August, 2018
Judges
  • Rajul Bhargava
Advocates
  • Ashok Kumar Singh