Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9696 of 2020 Applicant :- Vijay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Kumar Mishra,Hinchh Lal Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over bail application moved by the applicant, Vijay, in Case Crime No. 145 of 2019, under Sections-363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, Police station-Jaithra, District-Etah.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 13.06.2019; this First Information Report was delayed with no cogent reason; prosecutrix is at variance in her statements under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C. it was a voluntarily fleeing of the prosecutrix; there is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence, in case of release of bail; hence bail has been prayed for.
Learned learned AGA has vehemently opposed.
Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, gone through the material placed on record it is apparent that informant got this case lodged for missing of her daughter, who was said to be of 15 years; in medical age determination too the age has been fixed 14 to 15 years; prosecutrix is minor; her statement under Section 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C. is of enticing and taking by the applicant; the same is fully intact; sexual assault is very well said in it.
Considering all those facts and circumstances of the case; heinousness of offence of rape with a minor girl; aim and object of Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, likelihood of tampering with evidence in case of release on bail as well as likelihood of fleeing from course of justice, but without commenting on merit of the case, there appears to be no ground for bail.
Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
However, trial Court is directed to conclude the trial strictly in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C., without granting any unnecessary adjournment to the parties.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Deepak/