In a bail application under CrPC, the applicant challenged charges of rape and POCSO. The court found it a fit case for bail despite the allegations, without expressing an opinion on the merits.
The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties upon compliance with specific conditions.
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. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22028 of 2019
Applicant :- Irfan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant,learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in medical report the age of the victim has been shown about 19 years. At the time of the alleged incident the victim was major. The FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged with the delay of three months without any sufficient explanation. The statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. is clearly reflect that the victim was a consenting party. It has further been submitted that during the trial the statement of the victim has been recorded as P.W. 2 in which she has not supported the prosecution story and has been declared hostile. The victim in her statement has clearly stated that neither the applicant enticed away her not committed any wrong with her. In her cross examination she has stated that she had made wrong statement about her pregnancy. It has further been submitted that victim in her statement has not made any allegation against the applicant. No offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since13.4.2019.
Per contra,learned counsel for the complainant has not opposed the prayer for bail but learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Irfan involved in Case Crime No. 45 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, and Section 3 (2) 5 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Muirpur, District Sonbhadra be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 2.9.2020
A.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail subject to conditions.
Whether the delay in FIR registration and alleged inconsistent statements warrant bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Irfan
State of U.P.
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
