Allahabad High Court
Netrapal Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 17 August, 2023
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165533 Court No. - 48 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36040 of 2023 Applicant :- Netrapal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- R.K Singh Gaharwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard Sri R.K. Singh Gaharwar, learned counsel for applicant.
This is second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by a reasoned order on 20.04.2023 and relevant part of order is mentioned below -:
"In the present case, there is no dispute that victim is aged about 10 years. There is a specific allegation against applicant that he is quack doctor which has been vaguely denied by applicant in bail application.
Victim has specifically stated in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that applicant confined her inside the room and pull down her clothes and touched her private part as well as she specifically stated in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that applicant had inserted his finger inside private part of victim, at this stage, statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has more evidently value. There is no material in support of submission that it was a tutored statement as well as there is merit in the argument of learned A.G.A. that at this stage, the complaint case filed by applicant would have not adverse impact on the prosecution case, therefore, applicant who is facing serious charge of committing rape of a minor girl has not made out a case of bail."
I have perused the contents of bail application and found that only subsequent event for consideration of present bail application is that out of 9 prosecution witnesses, till date, only 3 prosecution witnesses have been examined including victim and possibility of conclusion of trial is remote.
Sri Chandan Agrawal, learned A.G.A.-I for State has opposed the bail and submits that prosecution witnesses, especially, victim has completely supported the prosecution case in her examination-in-chief and though she was cross examined at length, however, apparently, she remained consistent, therefore, at this stage, applicant may not be granted bail.
Considering above submissions of learned counsel for rival parties and taking note of nature of evidence, I am of the view that at this stage, applicant cannot be released on bail.
In view of above, bail application is rejected.
However, trial Court shall take all endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Order Date :- 17.8.2023 Nirmal Sinha