Application for bail in rape case rejected. Court held that despite applicant's age and lack of injury on the alleged victim, specific confessional statements and eyewitness accounts establish a fit case for detention.
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. - 24408 of 2022
Applicant :- Vikrma Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arvind Kumar learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.
By way of present application, applicant made a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 47 of 2022 under Sections 376, 504 I.P.C. Police Station-Reoti, District-Ballia during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is 60 years old person and entire allegation of rape against him is totally false and baseless and he has been falsely implicated in the present case on the behest of father of the prosecutrix and in fact applicant never committed rape with prosecutrix and therefore, considering the age of the applicant he may be released on bail and in fact, he did not commit rape with the prosecutrix. He further submitted that medical report of the prosecutrix does not support the allegation of the rape and there was no injury found on her private part. Therefore, considering this fact and considering the age of the applicant he may be released on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that there is specific allegation of rape against the applicant in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and further there are eye witnesses of the incident also who arrived at spot after hearing the scream of the prosecutrix and found that applicant was committing rape with her and when they arrived at spot, then he managed to escape, therefore the present bail be rejected.
I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case, applicant has sought bail in the present case merely on the ground that he is 60 years of age and there is no injury found on private part of the prosecutrix during her medical examination. As prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. specifically alleged that applicant committed
rape with her and further there are eye account in respect of alleged rape and from the perusal of the FIR it appears that the prosecutrix is mentally retarded girl aged about 19 years therefore considering the nature of the evidence and allegation made against the applicant I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly the application is rejected.
Order Date :- 22.6.2022 SY
Digitally signed by SWETA YADAV Date: 2022.06.24 18:27:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an applicant of 60 years, where the prosecutrix is mentally retarded and has no injuries, is eligible for bail in a rape case.
Whether a false allegation and lack of injury on the prosecutrix justify the grant of bail in a case involving a mentally retarded 19-year-old girl.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vikrma Prasad
State of U.P.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
