Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected by the court due to serious allegations of attempted rape on a minor via house trespass, weighing grave impact on victim against applicant's submissions.
No anticipatory bail granted; application is rejected.
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. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 15305 of 2021
Applicant :- Ankit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- R.S. Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Ankit in Case Crime No.95 of 2021, under sections 452, 376, 511, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Rohta, District Meerut.
The FIR allegation is that the accused applicant attempted rape on the victim, who was alone in house and she was aged about 16 years.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the case is false and whole family members have been implicated. Further submission is that co-accused Ajay and Suresh Chandra were allowed anticipatory bail by the court below, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to release on bail. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and applicant is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, there is no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and has submitted that the FIR shows that it is a case of attempted rape on a girl, who was minor and the rape was attempted by entering in the house of the girl when she was alone.
Considered the submissions of both the sides. In view of the allegation in the FIR and also considering the age of the victim and that the rape was attempted by committing tress-pass in her house. As such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is rejected .
Order Date :- 21.9.2021 Mini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case alleging attempted rape on a minor involving trespass into her house.
Whether equality of treatment between co-accused granted bail warrants grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ankit
State of U.P.
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
