This court dismissed a bail application filed by Shobhit Sharma in a case involving rape and child sexual offences. The court held that the gravity of the allegations and stage of trial precluded bail, though it directed the trial court to expedite proceedings.
Bail application rejected; trial court directed to expedite trial.
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. - 48 of 2019
Applicant :- Shobhit Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Upendra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Narayan Singh(Kushwaha)
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
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. 246 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366A, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children in Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Sidhpura, District Kasganj 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 victim herself has accompanied applicant. In her statement under Section 161 Cr. P.C., it has been stated by victim that she herself has called applicant by making a phone call and she has stated her age 16 years. It was further stated that victim has not sustained any injury and that allegation regarding rape is false and baseless. It was further submitted that applicant is also aged about 17-18 years and that now he is languishing in jail since 08.12.2017, having no criminal history and that in case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that as per medical examination report, age of victim is 13
years and that she has made allegation of rape against applicant in her statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr. P.C. It was also submitted by learned counsel for the complainant that evidence before trial court has already been led and now case is fixed for final argument.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence, stage of trial 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 Shobhit Sharma is hereby rejected .
However, keeping in view period of incarnation of applicant, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
Order Date :- 5.12.2019 T.S.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to an accused accused of rape and child sexual offences who claims victim falsely implicated him and has no criminal history.
Whether the trial court should expedite the trial in view of the applicant's incarceration period.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Shobhit Sharma
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
