Bail application allowed in a criminal case involving alleged sexual offences and theft. Court granted bail based on victim's statement lacking specific rape allegations against the applicant and parity of case. Bail granted on personal bond and sureties.
Released on bail by furnishing 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. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13219 of 2019
Applicant :- Govind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anup Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard Sri Anup Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State and perused the material available on record.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Govind, in Case Crime no.22 of 2018, under Sections 376D, 394, 411, 506 IPC and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act, Police Station Purandarpur, District Maharajganj.
Learned Counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and malafide intention for harassment. There is no allegation of rape in the FIR lodged by complainant against unknown offenders, which reveals an offence of theft and is registered under Sections 457, 380, 342 & 506 IPC. The FIR has been lodged by the father-in-law of the prosecutrix. Victim in statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. levelled no allegation of rape against the present applicant. Only allegation of rape is against coaccused Nasiruddin, for rest of the accused she further deposed that she could not identified any assailant except Nasiruddin. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of applicant, recovery shown from the possession of accused is totally false, fabricated and fake with no public witness. Co-accused Sanajy has already been granted bail on 21.01.2019 by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1164 of 2019 and the case of applicant is also on the same footing, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 01.02.2018. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and
submitted that accused was arrested with articles of theft. Victim supported the prosecution version in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. but AGA did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contention of learned counsel and statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. without commenting upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the accused applicant deserves bail.
Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Govind be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.3.2019 /// I.A.Siddiqui
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail on grounds of false implication and parity of case with a co-accused.
Govind
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
