Manoj v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2033 of 2019

Applicant :- Manoj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Manoj , in Sessions Trial No.566 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime no.614 of 2018, under Sections 366, 376, 325, 354-B, 511 IPC, Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur.

Heard Sri Anuj Bajpai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sudhir Kumar Pathak, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is named in the FIR as one of the three assailants, in connection with a case of outraging the prosecutrix's modesty and attempted rape, lodged by her mother after full information of the incident, and communication with her daughter. The First Information Report clearly names the applicant, Manoj along with co-accused Mone and Sonu showing the parentage of one, and the residential address of the other. It is submitted that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has nominated three persons as the offenders, but not mentioned anything about their names. Likewise, in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded on 23.10.2018, there is a clear allegation about three offenders attempting to ravish her and outraging her modesty, but there is no mention of their names, including that of the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has not been identified either by the prosecutrix, or by the prosecution witnesses as specifically asserted in paragraph 12 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. In such circumstances, learned counsel submits that reference to the applicant's name in the FIR is at the behest of the police, who got the FIR lodged, inculpating the applicant falsely for the motivation of solving a rape case.