Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165983

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44106 of 2021

Applicant :- Rakesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Dhaka Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

As matter pertains to provisions of POCSO Act, therefore, on 09.05.2023 notice was issued to opposite party no.2 i.e. informant of the case.

¶7

As per office report dated 11.07.2023 notice has been served upon the informant personally. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶8

Heard Sri Deepak Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vivek Dhaka, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatruhan Yadav, learned AGA for the State.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 839 of 2020, under Sections 376AB IPC and 5(m)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Medical, District Meerut during pendency of the trial.

¶10

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and according to the FIR applicant committed rape with the daughter of the informant aged about five years.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and due to enmity with regard to property applicant has been made accused in the present matter.

¶12

He further submits that from the medical report of the victim, it appears that her hymen was intact and this fact completely belies the allegation of rape made against the applicant.

¶13

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 27.11.2020 i.e. for more than two and half years and he is not having any criminal history.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is allegation against the applicant that he committed rape with the daughter of the informant aged about five years and victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant and from the medical report of victim it also reflects that there is sign of sexual assault, therefore, applicant does not deserve bail.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

As per allegation applicant committed rape with a girl aged about five years and the girl in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant and during medical examination although doctor found that hymen of the victim was intact but there was some injuries on her body and doctor also opined that it is a case of forcible sexual act.

¶17

Although, applicant in the present matter is in jail for more than two and half years but allegation made against the applicant are serious and minimum punishment provided under Section 376AB IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act is 20 years.

¶18

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.

¶20

However, considering the fact that applicant in the present matter is in jail for more than two and half years, trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the case within eight months from the date of production of certified copy of this order strictly as per provision 309 Cr.P.C. and Section 35 of POCSO Act, if there is no legal impediment.

¶21

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶22

Order Date :- 17.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shesh Nath Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Awadesh Kharwar Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manish Gaur @ Manni Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Vs State of U.P.