Second bail application in a POCSO case alleging rape of a 12-year-old girl; the applicant claimed false implication due to a family land dispute. The court noted medical findings corroborating the prosecution and rejected 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54059
Court No. - 32
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3965 of 2024
Applicant :- Umesh Giri Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Pratap Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
1. Case has been taken up through video conferencing.
2. As per office report dated 09.05.2024, notice has been served upon opposite party no.2 but none has appeared on behalf of complainant/opposite party no.2 to press the present bail application.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyanandra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
4. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 208 of 2022 under Sections 376, 328, 504, 506 IPC and 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Ahirauli District Ambedkar Nagar.
5. This is second bail application as the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 05.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1941 of 2023.
6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has also submitted that there is contradiction in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the mother of the prosecutrix had sold the land, which was opposed by the brother of the prosecutrix and the enmity was going on between the brother and the mother of the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is used to
help the mother of the prosecutrix, who is widow and the applicant is friend of the her father (dead). Since the applicant used to help the mother of the prosecutrix, therefore, the applicant has been falsely implicated. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no previous criminal history as such he should be released on bail.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the argument of learned A.G.A. that the prosecutrix was 12 years of age at the relevant time and the medical report is also supporting the prosecution case as mentioned in the FIR as well as in the statement of the proseuctrix recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C.,therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected .
(Brij Raj Singh, J.)
Order Date :- 6.8.2024 dk/
Digitally signed by :- DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant in a POCSO rape case involving a 12-year-old prosecutrix should be enlarged on bail on his second bail application.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Umesh Giri
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home
Brij Raj Singh
As recorded by the court registry
8 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
