Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9609 of 2018 Applicant :- Sonu @ Mota Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ratan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Ratan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 35/2017 under Section 376, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., 5(Chha)/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Onchha, District Mainpuri.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that due to village party bandi, the accused applicant has falsely been implicated by the father of the victim i.e. Opposite Party No.2. The radiological age of the victim is found to be 17 years. Accused is lying in jail since 15.06.2017. He has no criminal history. If he is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail stating that the victim is a minor girl of 12 years as per the F.I.R. version. She supported the prosecution version in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. alleging that the accused applicant had committed rape upon her, therefore, bail application of the accused applicant should be refused.
I have gone through the F.I.R.
As per the F.I.R., on 29.11.2017 at 11:00 A.M., the victim had gone to attend the nature's call where the accused applicant had tried to molest her. Since his daughter was a minor girl, she could not come earlier to lodge an F.I.R., hence, he has written report of this offence on 01.02.2017.
Looking to the fact that the victim is a minor girl of twelve years and even as per her Ossification Test, her age is found to be 17 years, hence a minor and she has supported the prosecution version that the accused applicant had committed rape upon her, at this stage, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the accused-applicant. Accordingly, bail is rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 309 Cr.P.C. within a further period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 VPS