Allowed

Govind Kashyap v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC4 Aug 2022/3337/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to Govind Kashyap in a criminal case involving rape and other IPC sections, granting relief based on contradictions in victim statements and lack of medical support for allegations, while imposing strict conditions on the applicant's conduct.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement of applicant on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

Govind Kashyap Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3337 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Govind Kashyap Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today in Court by the learned counsel for the applicant in reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf State is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Vijay Kumar, the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Ajay Raj Singh Tomar, rhw learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The applicant, Govind Kashyap , has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 426 of 2021, under Sections 376, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case due to village rivalry. No such incident, as alleged by the prosecution, took place. The entire prosecution story has been set up with intention to defame the image of applicant and his family members in the society.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that from the version of F.I.R. it appears that applicant has only tried to put pressure upon the victim to go with him in the forest. In the F.I.R. there is no allegation of committing rape upon the victim by the applicant on the date of incident, but it was alleged that about six months prior from lodging of the F.I.R. when the victim went to ease herself in forest the applicant committed here rape. In her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has narrated same story as alleged in the F.I.R., whereas, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has developed her case much more and direct allegation of rape has been levelled against the applicant therein. She further submits that she is pregnant. The story appears to be very improbable and unbelievable.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that victim is aged about 28 years and is major, whereas, the applicant is aged

¶11

about 25 years. The real fact behind the entire prosecution case is that there is a local enmity of village. The victim's brother is running a grocery shop, from where the applicant used to purchase items, there were some financial disputes between the brother of the victim and the applicant, and due to this reason the applicant has been implicated falsely.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the entire allegation of rape levelled against the applicant by the victim got demolished as the medical report of the victim does not support such allegation, wherein the concerned doctor found no any external or internal injury on the private parts or on all over body of the victim. Her pregnancy test also became negative. The entire prosecution story set up by the victim is false and was made only with malafide intention to defame the image of applicant and his entire family members, therefore, the applicant be enlarged on bail by this Court sympathetically.

¶13

Several other submissions regarding legality and illegality of the allegations made in the F.I.R. 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. The applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has also been pointed out that the applicant has a single case of N.D.P.S. Act in his criminal history, in which he is on bail, which fact has been stated in para-12 of the rejoinder affidavit filed today. The applicant is in jail since 12.10.2021 and has already undergone a substantial period of detention. In the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the courts, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is involved in a heinous crime, therefore, his prayer for bail may be rejected.

¶15

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, considering the fact that there is a vast contradiction in the statements of victim recorded under Section 161 and 164

¶16

Cr.P.C. with the version of the F.I.R.; medical report of the victim does not support the allegation of rape as no external or internal injury found on her private parts; as well as considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

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

¶18

Let the applicant, Govind Kashyap involved in Case Crime No. 426 of 2021, under Sections 376, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow, be enlarged 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 :-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(6) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶25

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

¶26

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶27

(8) 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.

¶28

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.

¶29

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 merit of the case.

¶30

Order Date :- 4.8.2022 Mustaqeem

¶31

Digitally signed by MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN Date: 2022.08.08 15:38:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Govind Kashyap v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Kashyap v. State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow

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

Indrajeet Vs State of U.P.

Dileep Kumar @ Deepu Verma Vs State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretarial U.P. Government Lucknow

Ankul Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Balakram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Mahante Alias Chulbul Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.

Kalau Alias Kamla Kant Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.