Suman v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 44

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12793 of 2021

Applicant :- Suman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Mishra,Vinod Kumar Shukla

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

The Court has convened through Video Conferencing .

Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.

Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 14 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Durgaganj, District Bhadohi.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the prosecution case one Gyan Chand @ Pappu, father of the victim lodged FIR against the brother of the applicant on 4.4.2019. The applicant was not named in the FIR and her name first time appeared in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. stating therein that she helped the co-accusedBheem in the conspiracy. It was further stated that the victim went with the brother of the applicant on her own sweet will and she in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. categorically stated that she was in relationship with the applicant's brother. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that when the applicant and other family members came to know about the relationship between victim and applicant's brother, she made a complain in this regard to her parents. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the victim Kajal is a major girl and she has left her house on her own sweet will and ran away with the applicant's brother and they went to Allahabad. The family members of the victim reached there and recovered the victim girl and thereafter she is with their parents. The victim girl was medically examined but no sign of rape was found. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the allegation of enticing away the victim from her house has been made against the applicant's brother Bheem. The age of the victim girl as per medical report is 19 years and she is major and as per radiologist no spermatozoa was found nor there is any opinion of the doctor regarding rape. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and she is not