Allahabad High Court
Dileep vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 23 July, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:117199 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57594 of 2022 Applicant :- Dileep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar,Surya Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Afshan Shafaut,G.A. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. and perused records. Ms Afshan Shafaut, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Services Authority is also present. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Dileep, who is involved in Case Crime No. 200 of 2022, under Sections 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Etawah.
3. According to the prosecution, an FIR was registered on 28.06.2022 to the effect that on 27.06.2022, around 12.00, daughter of the informant aged about 7 years, was lured with money and toffee and she was taken to home and thereafter committed rape upon her. It is alleged that after that his daughter came to her house screaming and told that the applicant did dirty work with her.
4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the above case with false allegations. It is further submitted that there are contradiction between the medical examination and the statement of the victim. In her statement, the victim has not stated that she was raped under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the informant also stated in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that there was an attempt to rape. There are contradictions in the statements of the victim. No blood stained clothes have been recovered in support of the victim's story from the alleged incident. There is no eyewitness to the incident. The applicant is in jail since 29.06.2022 and has no criminal history.
5. On the other hand, opposing the bail application, learned A.G.A. has submitted that as per the birth certificate issued by the Health Department/Municipal Council, Etawah, wherein the date of birth of the victim is mentioned as 23.02.2015 as per which the victim is a minor. It is further submitted that the victim has specifically given her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. accusing the applicant. In such circumstances, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and looking to the nature and severity of allegations, perusal of the statements of the victim, without commenting on merits of the case, at this stage, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.
7. Accordingly, present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. stands rejected and is consigned to record. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from today, in accordance with law and applicant will have liberty to approach this Court if trial is not concluded within aforesaid period along with its status.
Order Date :- 23.7.2024/RavindraKSingh