Bail application rejected. The court found insufficient grounds to grant bail after examining statements of the informant and victim, who alleged rape and sexual assault by the applicant against a minor child.
Bail application rejected; applicant not released on bail.
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. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40135 of 2022
Applicant :- Abhishek Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ranjit Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Mr. Ranjit Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant.
By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 79 of 2022, under Sections 354, 376 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Nagla Khangar, District-Firozabad, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution case, in brief, the informant who is mother of the victim aged about 14 years lodged F.I.R. on 09.06.2022 at 20:10 hours, under Section 354 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, with the allegations inter-alia that when her minor daughter was alone in the house, the applicant who is her neighbour came to her house and asked for mobile number of her daughter and after confining her daughter into a room tried to commit misdeed on her, when she returned he ran away from her house.
The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.07.2022, but his trial has not yet been concluded, therefore, the applicant is liable to be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the state as well as learned counsel for the informant have submitted that before the trial Court the informant and the victim have been examined as PW-1 and PW-2 on 06.12.2022 and 18.01.2023 respectively. They also produced the photocopy of the statements of PW-1 and PW-2 recorded before the trial Court for perusal of this Court.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, examined the matter in its entirety and perusing the statements of PW-1 and PW-2 recorded before the trial Court, I find that both the witnesses have supported the prosecution case and the victim has made allegation of rape on her against the present applicant-Abhishek. In the light of the statements of the informant and the victim who is a minor child aged about 14 years, recorded before the trial Court, I do not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is rejected .
It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial.
Order Date :- 25.4.2023 Kashifa
Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a trial involving rape and sexual assault against a minor.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Abhishek
State Of U.P.
Sanjay Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
