Dismissed
Govind Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.
Allahabad HCBAIL/4612/2019
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
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. - 84 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4612 of 2019 Applicant :- Govind Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra,Brijesh Kumar Mishra,Janardan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A., is taken on record.
Heard 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. 278 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376,120-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act, 2012, Police Station Rampur Karkhana, District Deoria with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has not committed any such offence. It was submitted that applicant and victim girl Sheela were having love affair and that when her family members came to know about it, they have lodged false FIR against the applicant. Learned counsel has also pointed out several letters allegedly written by victim girl to the applicant. It was further submitted that as per medical examination report, victim girl is aged 18 years, whereas another victim girl Nirmal Patel has not made any allegation against the applicant. It was further submitted that co-accused Ramashray Vishwakarma has already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.11.2017 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45359 of 2017. It has been further submitted that alleged victim girl Nirmal Patel has not made any allegation of rape in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C. Investigating
Officer has not traced the alleged place or premises, where victim girls were kept and victim Sheela was allegedly subjected to rape. It was submitted that applicant is in judicial custody since 10.08.2017 and in case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant has kidnapped two minor sisters and that as per statement of victim girl Sheela, she has made allegation of kidnapping and rape against the applicant and this version has also been supported by another victim namely Nirmal Patel, who has alleged that rape was committed on her sister in her presence and that she was closed in a room and given beatings. It was submitted that as per medical examination report, age of alleged victim Sheela is 18 years, whereas another victim is 16 years old.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence and all the attending facts and circumstances of case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the bail application of Govind Vishwakarma is hereby rejected .
Order Date :- 4.12.2019/T.S.
Govind Vishwakarma
State of U.P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court