Allahabad High Court
Anuj Pratap Tyagi vs State Of U.P. on 31 July, 2018
Bench: Karuna Nand Bajpayee
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27748 of 2018
Applicant :- Anuj Pratap Tyagi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh,Mayank Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 118 of 2017, u/ss. 376D, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Badgaon, District- Saharanpur.
Heard Sri Sunil Bashisht, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mayank Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
Perused the record.
Submission of counsel for the applicant is that though a number of persons are alleged to have committed rape upon the victim but there is no external injury found on the body of the victim and therefore, the prosecution story stands discredited and the applicant should be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has drawn the attention of the Court to the findings of the doctor with regard to condition of hymen and it has been pointed out that the same was found torn. Further submission is that it is a case in which the poor victim was dragged inside the room and on the point of pistol she was subjugated and coerced and then rape was committed consecutively by the accused persons. In such a state of horror to which the victim was subjected, there should hardly be any expectation that she would be putting any active resistance to the brute assault made upon her and therefore, absence of external injuries should hardly be deemed as a ground to disbelieve the prosecution story. Most of the times it is the resistance and struggle of the victim which results in the external injuries on her person. The applicant has been nominated as an accused in the F.I.R. itself and even when the victim was examined before the Magistrate she has given the details of sexual assault made upon her and it was narrated by her that when she was going to bank the co-accused Anil gagged her mouth and whisked her inside the house and she was locked there. Later on, the applicant arrived there and opened up the door and then he was followed by the co-accused persons Anil, Rajiv and one servant of Anil. The applicant Anuj Pratap Tyagi remained inside the room and the other three co-accused closed the room from outside and then the accused-applicant Anuj Pratap Tyagi committed rape upon her and tried to take her obscene photographs also. Then the co-accused Anil went inside and repeated the brute rape with her and then another co-accused Rajiv and servant of co-accused Anil indulged in the same carnal outrage. She was put under threat of life and was asked not to disclose it to anybody. Contention is that this is a case of gang rape and ordinarily an unmarried girl is not likely to make such kind of allegations because the same defiles her prestige and honour in the society and puts social stigma for the rest of her life. Even the parents would not be inclined to embroil the family honour by exposing their daughter to such kind of infamous controversy. Even when the victim was examined by the doctor she had disclosed about the sexual assault made by the four accused persons and the allegations of gang rape were disclosed at that stage also. There is no good ground to take a liberal view in the matter.
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 has not made out a case for bail.
Therefore, the prayer for bail of the applicant is rejected.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018
Naresh
