Criminal Revision dismissed as bail prayer against juvenile alleged offender was refused due to gravity of sexual assault and homicide charges despite FIR delay claims.
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.
1
Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 460 of 2018 Revisionist :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Raghvendra Pratap Rajan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Heard Sri R.P. Rajan, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Rajesh Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Despite issuance of notice to opposite party no.2, no counter affidavit has been filed. Accordingly, the Court considers it appropriate to proceed to decide the case on the basis of the material available on record.
The instant revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 24.11.2017 passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act/Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Ghaziabad by which the court below has rejected the appeal of the revisonist preferred against the order dated 6.9.2017 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad in Criminal Appeal No.123/17 arising out of case crime no.551 of 2016 u/s 302, 201, 342, 354C, 376D, 506,120B, 392, 364 IPC PS Tronica City District Ghaziabad.
The bail is being sought on the ground of juvenility.
Basic contention of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that there is delay in lodging the FIR. Much reliance has been placed on the averments made in para 15 and 16 of the affidavit accompanying the revision. The same has been perused by this Court.
Learned AGA has opposed prayer for bail.
The court concerned while dismissing the appeal filed on behalf of the revisionist has discussed the statement of the complainant, relevant portion of which reads herein as under:-
“तभी लगभग 10:30 बजे रात्री अचानक नीलू का पतित नीरज अपतने दो साथी िजनके नाम रफीक व दीपतक के साथ आया और सत्तार को लात घूसों से बहुत बुरी तरह मारना पतीटना शुर कर िदया और हाथ का फंदा बनाकर पतीछे से गले मे डालकर उठाकर नीचे पतटक िदया। िजससे सत्तार बेहोश हो गया। नीरज कह रहा था िक आज साले को अय्याशी का मजा चखाते है। िजन्दा नहीं छोड़ना उसके बाद रफीक व दीपतक ने मेरे साथ सामूिहक बलात्कार भी िकया तथा मेरी व सत्तार की नंगी िफल्म भी बनाई थी। उसके बाद दीपतक व रफीक ने अपतने अन्य साथी को बुलाकर मुल्लाजी सत्तार की ही मोटर साईिकल पतर मुल्ला जी सत्तार को बीच मे बैठाकर बेहोशी की हालत मे दीपतक व िदल्ली वाला साथी ले गये। रफीक व नीरज ने मेरे हाथ पतैर बांध िदये थे तथा मुल्ला जी सत्तार के हाथ पतैर चारपताई की रस्सी से बांधे थे। रफीक व नीरज तमंचा व चाकू से मुझे डराते भी रहे और धमकी दी िक यिद तुमने िकसी को बताया तो तेरे बच्चों को अगवा करके तेरे पतूरे पतिरवार को खत्म कर देगे। अन्य कथनों के साथ मुकदमा दजर कर कायरवाही की प्राथरना की गयी।"
Thus, the allegations as made against the revisionist find support from the statement of the complainant.
Looking to the gravity of the offence, no case for grant of any indulgence is made out. Accordingly, the bail prayer made on behalf of the revisionist is refused.
Consequently, the revision also stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.9.2019 SP
1 issue framed by the court
Whether delay in FIR weakens the case for bail in a serious offence involving rape and murder?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Deepak
State Of U.P.
Vipin Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
