Allowed

Kapil Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2023BAIL/56154/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble AHC granted bail to Kadil Singh (applicant) in rape case, noting discrepancy between FIR and victim statements and medical evidence, while clarifying observations apply only to bail disposal.

What did the court decide?

Kapil Singh released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in trial and not tamper with evidence.

Kapil Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:174736

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56154 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Kapil Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeepta Kumar Shahi,Mohd. Shoeb Khan

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,A.C.Tiwari(Ac),Ashish Kumar Singh,Dipak Srivastava

¶6

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶7

Rejoinder affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard Sri Mohd. Shoeb Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dipak Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Santosh Dubey, learned AGA for the State.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 108 of 2022, under Sections 376, 450, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Lalpura, District Hamirpur during pendency of the trial.

¶10

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant on 29.08.2022 under Sections 452, 354, 504, 506 IPC and according to the FIR in the absence of the husband of the victim applicant after entering in the house of the victim made sexual assault upon her in the intervening night of 27/28.08.2022. It is further mentioned in the FIR that when applicant coming out from the door then Kallu, one villager witnessed the applicant.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that totally on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and story narrated by the informant in the FIR and by the victim in her statements recorded under Sections

¶12

161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. appears to be highly improbable and no reliance can be placed on such version.

¶13

He further submits that prosecutrix is major and married lady and it is hard to believe that without her consent applicant could commit rape with her.

¶14

He further submits that FIR of the present case was lodged by the informant on the information furnished by the victim but there is no allegation of rape in the FIR and and only allegation against the applicant in the FIR is of sexual assault but subsequently when the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Investigating Officer then she started making allegation of rape against the applicant and similar allegation of rape was made by her against the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and this fact clearly suggests that subsequently on the instigation of her husband she started making allegation of rape against the applicant.

¶15

He further submits that prosecutrix was medically examined on 30.08.2022 and doctor found swelling on her vagina and when the statement of doctor was recorded by the Investigating Officer then he also stated that swelling on the vagina of the victim was found and on the wrist of the victim simple injury was also noted by him but as prosecutrix is married lady and her husband arrived at home on 28.08.2022, therefore, possibility cannot be ruled out that at the time when she was along with her husband she sustained swelling on the vagina.

¶16

He further submits that although applicant was also made accused in one case of Section 354 IPC but after investigation no charge-sheet was filed against the applicant under Section 354 IPC and only charge-sheet was filed against him under Sections 323, 504 IPC and after trial applicant has been

¶17

acquitted in that case and in the present matter he is in jail since 17.09.2022.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a case of rape and applicant committed rape after entering in the house of informant with victim i.e. wife of informant in her both the statements categorically stated that applicant on the point of country made pistol committed rape with her.

¶19

Learned counsel for the informant further vehemently submitted that doctor also find swelling on the vagina of the victim and injury on the wrist of the victim, therefore, medical report of the victim also corroborates the version of the prosecutrix but neither learned AGA nor learned counsel for the informant could dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged on the basis of information furnished by the prosecutrix but in the FIR there is no allegation of rape against the applicant and they further could not dispute the fact that victim is major and married lady and she was medically examined on 30.08.2022 and on 28.08.2022 in the morning her husband arrived at home and till her examination she resided along with her husband.

¶20

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

¶21

Although, prosecutrix, who is wife of the informant, made allegation of rape against the applicant in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. but there is no allegation of rape in the FIR, which was lodged by her husband on the basis of information furnished by her.

¶22

Further, admittedly prosecutrix is major and married lady and although doctor found swelling on her vagina and one

¶23

simple injury on her wrist but she is admittedly a married lady and according to the doctor injury may be caused about two days before and medical examination of the prosecutrix was conducted on 30.08.2022, therefore, injury may be caused even according to the doctor on 28.08.2022 and as per admitted case of the prosecution on 28.08.2022 her husband arrived at the home, therefore, it cannot be said at this stage that due to the act of the applicant she sustained injuries.

¶24

Further, although applicant was also made accused in another case of Section 354 IPC but after investigation no charge-sheet was filed against the applicant under Section 354 IPC and only charge-sheet was filed against him under Sections 323, 504 IPC and in that case he has been acquitted. Further, applicant is in jail since September, 2022 i.e. for almost a year.

¶25

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶26

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶27

Let the applicant - Kapil Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶28

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶29

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶30

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶31

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶32

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.

¶33

Order Date :- 29.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶34

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

Kapil Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Ikram Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others

Nanak Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Kohar Vs State of U.P.

Satpal Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Guljar Vs State of U.P.