Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12141 of 2021 Applicant :- Vikas Gautam Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Mani Singh,Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in case crime no. 684 of 2020, under Section 376-D IPC, P.S. Kalyanpur, District Kanpur nagar.
Heard Shri L.M. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant.Victim was major. She herself has admitted in the statement under Section 164 CrPC that co-accused Taj Mohammad was well known to her. No symptom of force said to have been used in commission of crime was found on the body of victim. It is also submitted that arrest of the applicant on the spot is false. At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant referred to statement of witnesses recorded under Section 161 and next contended that witnesses have stated that after arrest accused were beaten by the public. Referring to this fact it is also submitted that no injury was found on the body of the applicant. Applicant was not arrested on the spot. He has been falsely implicated in this case. If the entire prosecution case is taken into consideration then also victim was in love and affair with the co-accused. Referring to statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 CrPC it is further submitted that victim has changed the date of offence said to have been committed in the matter as 25.5.2020 in her statement under Section 164 CrPC. Thus it is evident that victim herself is not clear about the date of offence. No prima facie case is made out. This fact itself shows that F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of false facts. The applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 28.5.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
On the other hand, the learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that though in the counter affidavit same date has been mentioned as was disclosed by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC, yet a prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He was apprehended on the spot. F.I.R. was lodged immediately after the incident. Date of the offence disclosed in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC may be by mistake but victim has cleared the date of offence as 28.5.2020 in her statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Victim was alone at the time of commission of offence. Witnesses reached the place of offence and they apprehended the applicant and the co-accused at the place of occurrence.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, complicity of accused, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., statement of witnesses and victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. The bail application is liable to be rejected and the same is accordingly rejected.
However, trial court is directed to decide the trial of the matter expeditiously.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 safi