Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1065 of 2018 Appellant :- Sonu Alias Umesh Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ganesh Datta Sharma,Pankaj Sharma,Rahul Kumar Sharma,Rajesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgement and order dated 11.12.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Hathras in Case Crime No. 497 of 2017 under Section 363,376D of I.P.C., Section 4 of the POCSO Act & under Section 3(2)(5) of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Hathras Kotwali, District Hathras, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
Supplementary counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. is taken on record after service of a copy of the same on counsel for the appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that he does not desire to file any affidavit to the supplementary counter affidavit.
The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that even though in the statements made under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the name of the appellant was mentioned but in the testimony made by the mother of the victim before the trial court, she herself has denied the incident. It is, therefore, contended that it is a fit case for the bail.
Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, has strongly, opposed the bail application on the ground that in view of the unrebutted supplementary counter affidavit filed today, it is evident that the victim is a minor and the report of the Chief Medical Officer that is enclosed as page no. 25 of the supplementary counter affidavit reflects that victim's age is about 14 to 15 years. It is also contended that medical examination report reflects injuries and redness on the private parts of the victim and in the medical report also where the statement of the victim is recorded, she has named the appellant.
In view of the aforesaid facts, this court does not find it to be a fit case for bail and this Court does not find any illegality in the order passed by the court below. The bail of the appellant is rejected.
This appeal lacking in merit is, accordingly, dismissed.
Learned counsel for the appellant prays for a direction from this Court for expeditious trial. However, as per the own admission of the learned counsel for the appellant, the evidence in the case is proceeding. Therefore, there is no occasion to make any such order for expeditious trial.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 A. V. Singh (Jayant Banerji,J.)