This judgment grants bail to the applicant in a case involving alleged rape and sexual assault. The court noted no specific allegations against the applicant, distinguishing the case from the co-accused, and fixed conditions for release.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27433 of 2018
Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.520 of 2017, under Sections 328, 376,420, 506, 120B IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Budaun, with the prayer to release him on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix is a grownup married lady having four children. It is stated in the first information report that the applicant and co-accused Ramakant Sharma, who were running a Training Organization of which the applicant is the President. It is stated that she had given Rs.20,000/- to the applicant for training. However, co-accused Ramakant Sharma the coordinator of the Institution sexually exploited her and also committed rape after administering some intoxicating thing in the cold drink. In fact, the allegation made by the prosecutrix are totally false and fabricated. The reality is that she had fallen in love with co-accused Ramakant as the husband of prosecutrix was critically ill, they had also solemnized marriage. Lastly, it is submitted that the allegation of rape, sexual assault and abuse has been made only against co-accused Ramakant Sharma. In the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., there is no allegation of rape against the applicant, therefore, the case of applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused. It is next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 9.5.2018.
Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that it is a very serious offence in which a poor lady has been exploited by the applicant. However, he could not dispute that there is no allegation of rape so far as the applicant is concerned.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Dinesh Kumar Sharma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable
sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that :-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(2) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
(3) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the Courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 2.8.2018 Hasnain
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the present circumstances.
Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
