Barati and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23596

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4184 of 2024

Applicant :- Barati And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dharm Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Dharm Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned Additional Government-I Advocate for the State, and perused the records.

¶7

This is the second application seeking release of the applicants on bail in Case Crime No.0532 of 2022, under Sections 354(B), 376D, 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Palia, District Kheri. Their first bail application has been dismissed as withdrawn by means of an order dated 09.10.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14833 of 2022.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 12.09.2022 against four persons, including the applicants and their fathers, namely, Om Prakash and Hariram. Om Prakash and Hariram are real brothers, sons of Jailal, stating that the accused persons, namely, Om Prakash, Hariram, Barati and Badri were indulging in indecent talks and hurling abuses at the door of the informant's house. When the informant's son objected, they had beaten up the informant's son. Her son went to the police station. Thereafter, the accused persons entered the informant's house, they had beaten the

¶9

informant's daughter. Om Prakash said that they would abduct the informant's daughter. The applicants- Badri and Barati, who is son of Om Prakash, disrobed the informant's daughter and they raped her. The informant went to the police station but her FIR was not registered, although she kept on going to the police station continuously for 2-3 days. She got her daughter medically examined on 16.08.2022 and the medical examination mentions injuries on the body.

¶10

In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 CrPC, she reiterated the FIR version. In response to a specific question put to her that the lady constable had called her for medico-legal examination of her daughter but yet she did not come, the informant did not give any reply.

¶11

Report of the medico-legal examination conducted on 07.09.2022 mentions no mark of injury or sign of use of force.

¶12

The injury form of the victim prepared on 16.08.2022 mentions complain of pain in right shoulder, right elbow, chest and cervical region and abrasion on the shoulder.

¶13

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 CrPC, she stated that all the accused persons had come to her home. Om Prakash and Hariram (fathers of the applicants) kept on standing outside, while the applicants raped her.

¶14

The State has filed its counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the material collected during investigation and a copy of the charge-sheet.

¶15

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicants annexing therewith copies of statements of PW-1 and PW-2 recorded by the trial Court.

¶16

During her cross-examination, the victim stated that Barati

¶17

had levelled allegation that her brother Suraj had committed theft of his mobile phone. An altercation had taken place between them between 11-12 a.m. on 11.08.2022. She had gone to save her brother and she had fallen down in the altercation and had suffered injuries. She had suffered a fracture in her hand and blood was oozing from various parts of her body.

¶18

The learned Additional Government Advocate-I has opposed the bail application and submitted that the informant and the victim have supported the allegations in their statements.

¶19

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicants are cousins and their fathers are real brothers who have also been made accused in the case; the victim has admitted that an altercation had taken place between her brother and the applicants during the day on the allegation that her brother had stolen a mobile phone of one of the applicant- Barati and she suffered injuries in that incident; she has alleged that the applicants' fathers, who are real brothers, came to her house and kept on standing outside, while their sons entered the house and raped her; the allegation of rape is not supported by any other material and that the applicants are languishing in jail since 15.10.2022; statements of informant and victim already been recorded and in case of release of the applicants on bail, there is no possibility of the witnesses being influenced, I am of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶21

Let the applicants- Barati and Badri be released on bail in the aforesaid case on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of

¶22

magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶24

(ii) the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless their appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶25

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶26

Order Date :- 24.4.2025 MVS/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Barati and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Barati and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Asif Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Asif Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Asif Nasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Saleem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ramzan Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Sumit Chauhan Vs C.B.I. Special Crime Branch Lko.