Allowed

Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2020BAIL/41272/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Shamim Ahmed granted bail to Ashish Rajpoot charged under IPC 376, 506 and POCSO sections in Police Station Chakeri, Kanpur Nagar. The court considered contradictions in victim statements, non-conclusive medical report, and lack of convincing material for tampering.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing personal bond and two sureties in like amount with specific conditions.

Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41272 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kartikeya Saran,Anand Bhaskar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State as well as Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in FIR No.570 of 2020, under sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children against Sexual Offence Act, 2012, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely roped in this case due to malafide intention. The story behind the prosecution is that the applicant is nephew of landlady Smt. Mamta Rajpoot and the informant has not paid the rent for the last 10 months and on demand made by the landlady and supported by the applicant, the informant has been falsely implicated the applicant in this case. This averments have been made by the applicant in paragraph no.21 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.

¶8

Further learned counsel for the applicant argued that there is a vast contradiction in the first information report and the statements made under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C of the victim, whereas in her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that the alleged incident happened when her family members including the father and mother were sleeping, whereas in the statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that her mother and father went for job outside the house.

¶9

Further learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court that the victim was medically examined on the very next day of the incident i.e. 11.08.2020 at about 12.30 p.m. at A.H.M. & Dufferin Hospital, Kanpur Nagar and in the medical report the doctor has given opinion that on the basis of vaginal smear report and examination no opinion can be given about sexual assault. It was further mentioned that spermatozoa was not seen in the vaginal smear.

¶10

It was further argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per medical report hymen was old torn and healed, which clearly demonstrates that no current sexual assault was done with the victim and the allegation of rape against the applicant is totally false and fabricated. Further argument is that as per the Medical Board the age of the victim was around 17 years.

¶11

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 11.08.2020 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo involved in FIR No.570 of 2020, under sections 376, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children against Sexual Offence Act, 2012, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶16

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶18

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶19

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

(5)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶21

(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing

¶22

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 14.12.2020 SFH

Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikki Alias Vikas (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brahmadeo Rai Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramdhari Dinkar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Surendra Singh Rana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjeev Kumar Ghosh Vs State of U.P. and Another