In a bail application for alleged offences under IPC and P.O.C.S.O. Act, the Court rejected the prayer. The Court held that the nature and gravity of the allegations against the applicant did not make out a case for bail.
Prayer for grant of bail was rejected.
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. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43756 of 2022
Applicant :- Kallu Alias Lavkush Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Siya Ram Sahu,Puneet Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Prajapati Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 128 of 2021, under Sections 342, 363, 376 of IPC and Section 4 of P.O.C.S.O. Act, Police Station Girwan, District Banda with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that as per the school certificate the age of the victim is determined to be 17 years. There are contradiction in the statement of victim under Section 161 and 164 CrPC initially the first information report was lodged against the three persons including the applicant and the name of the two persons Dayala and Subbi had been exonerated by the investigating officer. It is further submitted that the place of occurrence as alleged to be the house(open baramdah) of Dayala. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 07.09.2021 having no criminal history and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Per contra learned AGA assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that as per the school certificate the age of the victim is 15 years. The victim in her statement under Section 164 has stated her age to be 14 years, therefore, at the time of the occurrence she was a minor girl. It is further argued that the victim in her statement under Section 161 and 164 CrPC has specifically stated that the present applicant committed rape with her. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations and gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that no case for grant of bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby rejected.
Any observation made above shall not be treated as any finding on the merit and shall not prejudice the trial. Order Date :- 25.1.2023 Virendra
Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a rape case involving a minor.
Kallu Alias Lavkush
State Of U.P.
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
