Allahabad High Court
Puneet vs State Of U.P. on 16 November, 2016
Bench: Karuna Nand Bajpayee
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 43
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 315013 OF 2016
IN
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5150 of 2016
Appellant :- Puneet
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State today, is taken on record.
Case called out in the revised list.
Applicant's counsel as well as counsel for the first informant and learned AGA are present.
In this matter lower court's record was summoned but have not been received as yet.
It has been insisted upon by the applicant's counsel that the bail application in the appeal be heard. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to hear the matter on the basis of the available record and judgement and the statements that have been annexed along with the appeal as all the relevant papers are already on record.
Submission of the counsel is that according to the medical examination the age of the girls is about 16/17 years. Further submission is that the allegation of rape upon the victim does not find corroboration from the medical evidence. Contention raised is that actually the girl was carrying on love affairs with the applicant and because they were detected in a compromising position by the brother of the victim, that is why the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case in order to save her honour. Delay in lodging of the FIR has also been emphasized and it has been submitted that admittedly when the family members had come to know about the incident, the matter ought to have been promptly reported. There is no adequate explanation from the side of the prosecution for the delay in lodging of the FIR. It has also been submitted that there is no external injury, which may corroborate the commission of rape upon the victim, as alleged by the prosecutrix. It was also pointed out that the applicant/appellant is in jail since 07.09.2016.
Learned AGA as well Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the first informant have been heard. They both have vehemently opposed the bail.
Perused the record.
Submission of the learned AGA is that after the occurrence the accused Pradeep and other associates of him had come to the house of the victim and had manhandled the brother of the victim and threatened him with dire consequences, in case the FIR would be lodged by them and that is the adequate explanation for the delay in lodging of the FIR. Further submission is that P.W.- 2, the victim herself has given her evidence in the court alleging the commission of rape upon her by the accused and there is no reason to falsely implicate the accused. There are no adequate grounds on the basis of which her testimony may be assailed. Her brother, who had been examined as P.W.- 3, has also corroborated her statement and it has been deposed by P.W. -3 that he too had reached the place of occurrence after hearing the shrieks of his sister and, therefore, had the opportunity to see the applicant/appellant on the spot, who made his escape good after his arrival. It has been further submitted that the appellant has been sentenced for a maximum period of seven years and his period of detention can hardly be said to be at all is drawn out, that may constitute any good ground to release him on bail.
Looking to the nature of offence, its gravity and the evidence in support of it and the overall circumstances of this case, this Court is of the view that the applicant/appellant has not made out a case for bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the applicant/appellant is rejected
Order Date :- 16.11.2016
shailesh
.
.
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5150 of 2016
Appellant :- Puneet
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Sharma
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Bail of the appellant was heard and refused, office is required to summon the lower court's record at the earliest, prepare the paper book and list this case for final hearing in due course.
Order Date :- 16.11.2016
shailesh
