Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40829 of 2018 Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vindeshwari Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of applicant Vinod Kumar in connection with Case Crime No. 126 of 2018 under Sections 376-D, 506 IPC, P.S. Didauli, District Amroha (J.P. Nagar).
Heard Sri Vindeshwari Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.P. Singh Gaur, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated on the basis of a belated FIR lodged five months after the occurrence in the background that there was an ongoing love affair between the applicant and the prosecutrix. It is submitted that her family members were averse to the aforesaid relationship and it is under their pressure that the prosecutrix falsely implicated the applicant along with others in the present crime, including a charge of gang rape. It is pointed out that a charge sheet in the present case has been filed against the applicant alone as asserted in paragraph no. 14 of the affidavit in support of the bail application whereas investigation against rest of the accused is still pending. It is argued that in case the other accused are exculpated, the charge under Section 376D IPC would go, and, with it, much to the veracity of the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a respectable man with no criminal history and is in jail since 08.05.2018.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., there is a categorical allegation not only of rape but of gang rape against the applicant and the co-accused.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case at this stage but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for bail at this stage.
Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected at this stage.
It is provided that the applicant will have liberty to renew his prayer through a fresh application for bail immediately upon the contingency of the other co-accused in the crime being exculpated during investigation.
The trial court is directed to expedite proceedings and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within six months next from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate strict coercive measure for ensuring their presence. Once, the witnesses appear, they will not be discharged until their evidence is recorded.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 26.10.2018 Deepak