In a bail application under Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act for rape of a 9-year-old, the court noted discrepancies in victim statements and lack of blood evidence suggested innocence but rejected the prayer due to the grave nature of the offence and lack of justifiable grounds for release.
Bail application rejected
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. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50718 of 2017
Applicant :- Mohd. Javed @ Monu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Imtiyaz Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Srivastava,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for applicant is taken on record.
Heard Sri Syed Imtiyaz Ali, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Mohd. Javed @ Monu with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 251 of 2017, under Sections 376 I.P.C. and Sections 5(m), 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, Police Station Mauaima, District- Allahabad during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. He further submits that there is variation in the statement of victim u/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. He next submits that blood stain of the victim have not been taken into possession which create doubt about the prosecution version. Learned counsel for applicant has relied upon the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Rahim Beg Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 1972 LawSuit (SC) 245 in which it has been held that in the absence of any injury marks on the organ of accused would point
towards his innocence. He has also submitted that the story of rape narrated by the prosecutrix is false and improbable. He has further submitted that applicant who is in jail since 20.07.2017 has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that prosecutrix aged 9 years, has fully supported the prosecution in her statement u/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and it finds with her medical report also which clearly states that there are signs suggestive of recent forceful penetration of vagina of sexual violence.
Looking to the gravity and severity of the offence and also the statement of the victim as well as other materials placed on record, this Court does not see any justifiable ground to set applicant at liberty.
The bail application sans merit and is accordingly rejected .
Order Date :- 22.2.2018 Siddhant Sahu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving rape against a minor.
Whether there is a substantial doubt regarding the prosecution's case to warrant release on bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rahim Beg Vs. State of Uttar PradeshReferred¶8
_Rahim Beg Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 1972 LawSuit (SC) 245_
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Javed @ Monu
Umesh Chandra Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
