Allowed bail to the applicant accused of rape and kidnapping. The court noted unexplained delay in FIR, absence of villager statements, and conflicting medical opinion regarding victim age, finding the prosecution case prima facie suspected.
Applicant released on bail on personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.
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. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1877
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 155 of 2024
Applicant :- Dheeraj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Kumar Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
2 . The F.I.R. in question was lodged alleging that the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years had gone to relieve herself, at about 11 PM on 29.09.2023 and on the way, the applicant, who was sitting there caught hold of her and took her to his home and thereafter closed her in a room and thereafter committed rape on her. It was also stated that daughter of the informant raised hue and cry, when the villagers came and her life could be saved. It was also stated that when the applicant reached the spot, he found his daughter to be in debilitated condition. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C, the victim supported the prosecution story, similarly under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she supported the prosecution story. It was alleged that applicant had caused severe injuries.
3 . The counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the statement of the informant stating that daughter of the informant was quite scared and thus, name of the other persons were also mentioned, however, on the information received from the daughter, it was alleged that wrong was done only by the applicant and no one else. In the
light of the said material, the counsel for the applicant argued that the FIR in question was lodged on 02.10.2023 after about four days without explaining the delay. He further argued that the delay becomes fatal in view of the own assertion that all the villagers had gathered on a cry being raised by the victim and the informant had recovered her in a bad condition. It is further argued that none of the statement of the villagers have been recorded. It is further argued that it is a case of false prosecution in as much as a civil litigation in between the parties is going on, a copy of the litigation under Section 198(4) of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951 has been filed as Annexure No. 11. The medical report on record does not support the prosecution story. In the light of the said, it is argued that the applicant should be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 05.10.2023.
4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.
5 . On the perusal of the material on record, prima facie, the allegations were leveled that after the commission of rape, the victim had raised an alarm and the villagers collected at the spot, however, none of the statements of the villagers is on record. The delay in lodging the F.I.R. particularly when the lots of villagers had gathered, prima facie, has not been explained, medical report on record does not corroborate the F.I.R. version, as per the medical opinion, the age of the victim is about 18 years.
6. Considering overall statements, prima facie, the version of the prosecution appears to be suspected particularly in view of the fact that there being an ongoing civil litigation in between the parties, the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 05.10.2023 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing
any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .
7. Let the applicant Dheeraj Kumar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 461 of 2023, under Sections 376(3), 342 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Mill area, Ddistrict Raebareli on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;
(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and
(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 8.1.2024 Arun
Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the explanation for delay in lodging the FIR and lack of medical corroboration.
Whether the alleged ongoing civil litigation influences the bail application.
5 provisions across 4 enactments
Dheeraj Kumar
State Of U.P.
Pankaj Bhatia
Arun Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
