Allahabad High Court
Vipin Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 16 May, 2018
Bench: Karuna Nand Bajpayee
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 65 of 2016
Appellant :- Vipin Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ved Prakash Pandey,Anita Singh,Daya Shanker Pandey,Satya Prakash Pandey,Virendra Kumar Jaiswal
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
(Ref : Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.249797 of 2017)
This second bail application has been moved on behalf of appellant-applicant Vipin Kumar in aforesaid appeal seeking his release on bail in S.T. No.1414 of 2014, u/s 376 I.P.C., P.S.-Masoori, District-Ghaziabad. First bail application has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 24.11.2016.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned A.G.A.
Perused the record.
Counsel for the appellant has once again tried to reiterate the merits of the case. It has also been submitted by the counsel that the father of the appellant is not well and he needs some medical aid and support and for that purpose the appellant should be released on bail on humanitarian grounds as the appeal is not likely to be heard at an early date.
Perusal of earlier bail rejection order reveals that the merits of the case have already been gone into by the Court, and therefore there is no justification to revisit the merits of the case again and again. So far as the argument addressing the humanitarian aspects is concerned, this Court cannot succumb to such emotions without keeping in perspective the merits of the case. Not that the courts have no sentiments or that the courts are not conscious about humanitarian aspects or the rights of the prisoners but the courts also cannot allow appeals to human emotions to weigh in a manner so as to override the harsh facts of the case and ignore the gravity of the offence which is so apparent on the face of record. This is a case in which the honour of a tender girl child of nine years was ravished, who after being subjected to this carnal savagery turned unconscious. Her hymen was found torn and inner membrane was also found torn. It appears that the appellant does not belong to ordinary class of law breakers as the type of brute inhumanity in which he has indulged, speaks about the depravity of his character. It is writ large on the face of record that the appellant belongs to that ignoble class of delinquents who have no restraining moral qualms and who, blinded by their lascivious propensities, can stoop to the debased level of indulging in such kind of perverted lust for flesh as has been displayed in this case. The Court has judicial accountability and has to strike a balance between social defence and the human rights of an accused. The rights of the victim and her family are no less important than the rights of the accused or his family and any lopsided unilateral over emphasis on the humanitarian aspect may result in gross injustice and the entire process of administration of law and justice may get reduced into a sheer farce. The appellant is in jail not under any illegal detention. He is in jail after complying with due process of law. The procedure prescribed by law has been followed and after giving fullest opportunity to accused to defend himself through process of trial the Court has found the appellant guilty of such heinous offence as aforesaid on the basis of unimpeachable evidence. This Court does not see any such good ground on the basis of which the impugned judgment may be castigated or on the basis of which it may be said that there is even a prima facie case in favour of accused.
The second bail application of the accused-appellant is, therefore, rejected.
(Ref: Criminal Misc. Parole Application No.3 of 2018)
Since the second bail application of the applicant-appellant has been rejected, therefore, the parole application also for similar reasons stands dismissed.
(Order on memo of Appeal)
List this appeal in due course for hearing before appropriate bench after preparing the paper book.
Order Date :- 16.5.2018
M. Kumar
