The single judge granted bail to the applicant charged with rape, noting prima facie reasons including delay in FIR, lack of medical corroboration, and victim dismissal from job, subject to standard bail conditions and sureties.
Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and no adjournment seeking.
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. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53245 of 2022
Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nikhil Kumar,Mayuri Mehrotra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Applicant- Rajesh seeks bail in Case Crime No. 335 of 2021, under Section 342 and 376-D IPC, P.S. Fatehganj West, District- Bareilly..
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that as per the allegations made in the F.I.R. it is alleged that on 14.10.2021 at about 7.30 a.m. in the morning the victim had gone at the house of the applicant to cook food and it is alleged that the applicant had committed rape on her and thereafter detained her till 7.00 p.m. in the evening and thereafter set her free and dismissed her from the job.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that even according to the prosecution own case, the victim was kept for more than 12 hours at the house. However, during this period neither she made any alarm nor any complaint was made by her. The victim is a mature lady aged about 30 years.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that since the applicant has dismissed the prosecutrix from her service, the present criminal case has been falsely registered against him.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn attention of the Court to the medical report which does not corroborate the prosecution story. During
course of investigation, the victim has not cooperated and as such her statement could be recorded only after lapse of ten months i.e on 16.8.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the F.I.R. was also lodged after seven days i.e. on 21.10.20221.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 1.10.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. The charge sheet has already been submitted. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the evidence as such prima facie a case for bail is made out.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of record, it is evident that as per the allegations made in the F.I.R. it is alleged that on 14.10.2021 at about 7.30 a.m. in the morning the victim had gone at the house of the applicant to cook food and it is alleged that the applicant had committed rape on her and thereafter detained her till 7.00 p.m. in the evening and thereafter set her free and dismissed her from the job. Even according to the prosecution own case, the victim was kept for more than 12 hours at the house. However, during this period neither she raised any alarm nor any complaint was made by her. The victim is a matured lady aged about 30 years. The medical report also does not corroborate the prosecution story. During course of investigation, the victim has not cooperated and as such her statement could be recorded only after lapse of ten months i.e on 16.8.2022. Even the F.I.R. was also lodged after seven days i.e. on 21.10.20221. The prosecutrix has admittedly been dismissed from the job which primafacie at this stage may be a reason for false implication. The applicant is in jail since 22.8.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. The charge sheet has already been submitted. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the
evidence In the backdrop of the said facts and circumstances prima facie a case for bail is made out.
Let applicant- Rajesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(2). The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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 IPC.
(4). 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, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 9.12.2022 R
Digitally signed by RAM ASARE MORYA Date: 2022.12.12 13:29:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted in a case involving charges of rape under Section 376-D IPC.
Whether the delay in lodging FIR and recording victim statement supports a prima facie case for bail.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajesh
State of U.P.
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
