Appeal against rejection of bail petition under Sections 376 IPC and SC/ST Act. Court found no fit case for bail due to serious allegations of rape and medical evidence, dismissing the appeal.
Bail prayer is declined; appeal is dismissed.
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 APPEAL No. - 4439 of 2018
Appellant :- Naresh Sahani Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Pravin Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
As indicated in the counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A., notice has been served personally on respondent No.02, yet no one has appeared on his behalf to oppose the bail prayer in the instant appeal.
Heard Sri Pravin Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This appeal has been filed against judgement and order dated 22.11.2017 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Gautam Buddha Nagar passed in Bail Application No. 4496 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 887 of 2017, under Sections 376 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Phase-3, Noida, District Gautam Buddha Nagar, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that order of the learned court below rejecting bail application of applicant-appellant is bad in law. In fact, it is a case of love affair between the victim and the appellant and when the victim was seen in objectionable position with the appellant by her sister, the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is aged about 20 years. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that learned court below has also failed to consider that appellant has no criminal history to his credit and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Thus the appellant, who is in jail since 27.08.2017, deserves to be released on bail.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail prayer and submitted there is specific allegation of rape against the appellant after barging in the house of the victim when no one was present in the house. The victim has consistently stated about commission of rape on her by the appellant and external injury has been noted on the person of the victim by the doctor in the medical report. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Having heard the submission of learned counsel of both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against appellant and evidence in support of it, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant.
The prayer for grant of bail to the appellant is declined. In the result, appeal is dismissed, accordingly.
Order Date :- 4.9.2018 MN/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail plea of the appellant should be allowed in a case under Section 376 IPC and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Whether the circumstances presented constitute a fit case for grant of bail.
Naresh Sahani
State Of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
