The Allahabad High Court rejected a bail application filed by Saurav Singh in a rape case. While finding it unfit for bail due to the offence's gravity, the court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months considering the applicant's long incarceration.
Bail rejected; trial directed to conclude within six months.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:107038
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27209 of 2020
Applicant :- Saurav Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Kanaujiya,Anjali,Madan Mohan Yaduvanshi,Pankaj Kumar Mishra,Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mrityunjay Dwivedi
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as Sri Mrityunjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No.237 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Jawan, District-Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that prior to this incident, the applicant had committed rape upon her but no complaint was lodged by her. It is also submitted that during medical examination of the victim, neither spermatozoa nor any injury was found on her person. It is also submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.5.2020. There is no substantial progress in the trial and only statement of the informant has been recorded as prosecution witness, who has not corroborated the prosecution version and did not make any allegation as described in the First Information Report. At last,
learned counsel for the applicant prays that the applicant may kindly be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that statement of the victim is yet to be recorded and if the applicant is granted bail there is every possibility that he will tamper with the material witness of the incident. It is also contended that the victim in her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically made allegations of rape against the applicant. Hence, the applicant does not deserve any leniency by this Court and his bail application is liable to be rejected.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant, gravity of the offence and severity of punishment, I do not find it a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Saurav Singh is hereby rejected.
However, considering the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.5.2020, the trial court is directed to make every endevaour to conclude the trial expeditiously within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it, if there is no other legal impediment, keeping in mind the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C.
Order Date :- 16.5.2023 Manish Himwan
Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving alleged rape.
Whether the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously given the delay in incarceration.
Saurav Singh
State of U.P.
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
