Allahabad High Court
Ajaypal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 December, 2022
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5759 of 2021 Applicant :- Ajaypal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Singh,Arti Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Yogendra Kumar Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Record of Criminal Misc. Bail application No. 42787 of 2021 has wrongly been attached along with present application for bail. Same shall accordingly stand detached.
Heard Mr. Vijay Pratap Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mrs. Arti Bhatt, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Yogendra Kumar, the learned counsel for first informant.
Rejoinder affidavits filed by learned counsel for applicant in Court today are taken on record.
Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 5.10.2020 a belated F.I.R. dated 9.10.2020 was lodged by first informant Jitendra Singh, which was registered as Case Crime No. 726 of 2020, under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Sisaganj, District Firozabad. In the aforesaid F.I.R. applicant Ajaypal has been nominated as solitary named accused.
Gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that named accused enticed away the minor daughter of first informant x-minor aged about 16 years.
After lodging of aforesaid F.I.R. Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. He first recorded the statement of first informant who has supported the prosecution story as unfolded in F.I.R. The prosecutrix was recovered on the next day i.e. 10.10.2020. Thereafter the statement of prosecutrix was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C, wherein she has supported the F.I.R. Subsequent to above, the prosecutrix was medically examined. Prosecutix in her statement before the Doctor has reiterated her earlier statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. The Doctor who examined the prosecutrix did not find any signs on her body so as to denote commission of sexual assault. With regard to private part of the prosecutrix, the Doctor opined as follows; ''Hymen torn out". Certain samples were taken from the body of prosecutrix for pathological examination. However, the same show negative results. Ultimately, the statement of prosecutrix was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein the prosecutrix has not only supported the F.I.R but has also detailed the entire sequence of events which have occurred from 5.10.2020. Investigating Officer, examined certain other witnesses also in the course of investigation who have supported the F.I.R.
On the basis of above and other material collected by Investigating Officer during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that complicity of the applicant/named accused is established in the crime in question. Accordingly he submitted the charge sheet dated 21.10.2020, whereby applicant has been charge-sheeted under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, After submission of aforesaid, charge sheet, Cognizance was taken upon same by Court concerned. Resultantly aforementioned Sessions Trial came into existence. Up to this stage, two prosecution witnesses of fact i.e. P.W.1 Jitendra Singh and P.W.2 (prosecutrix) have been examined. they have supported the F.I.R.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused but he is innocent. Prosecutrix is a willing and consenting party. She remained with applicant for almost four days. On the aforesaid premise, it is urged that no offence as alleged is made out against applicant.
Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 13.10.2020. As such, he has undergone more than two years and two months of incarceration. In case applicant is enlarged on bail he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. Trial is in progress and two prosecution witnesses of fact have also been examined. The evidence sought to be relied upon by prosecution against applicant stands crystalized. As such, custodial arrest of applicant is not absolutely necessary during course of trial. On the aforesaid premise, it is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A and the learned counsel for first informant have jointly opposed this application for bail. They submit that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. Applicant is guilty of dislodging the modesty of a young girl. Attention of the Court was invited to the statements of prosecutrix recorded before Court below and on basis thereof, he submits that prosecutrix in her aforesaid statement has supported the F.I.R.. There is nothing on record on the basis of which false implication or malicious prosecution of the applicant can be inferred. They therefore, contend that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant.
When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.
Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, as well as complicity of applicant, accusation made coupled with the fact that prosecutrix in her statement before the Court below has clearly supported the F.I.R, there being nothing on record to infer false implication or malicious prosecution of applicant, trial is in progress and any observations made by this Court qua the evidence which has emerged during the course of trial, may affect the prosecution or defence, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, this Court does not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail.
In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be rejected.
It is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 22.12.2022 Arshad