Allahabad High Court
Chunna Lal @ Chunnilal vs State Of U.P. on 8 May, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9855 of 2018
Applicant :- Chunna Lal @ Chunnilal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ikshwaku Srivastava,Babu Lal Ram,Gyanendra Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
This bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Chunna Lal @ Chunnilal who is involved in Case Crime No. 1049 of 2017, under section 363, 366, 376(A), 506 IPC and Section 3/4 and 17/18 POCSO Act, P.S. Sarai Khwaja, District Jaunpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in medical report the age of the victim has been shown about 17 and 1/2 years. In fact, at the time of alleged incident the victim was major. The statements of victim recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. show that the victim travelled with the applicant and remained with him about 4 days but during this period she did not make any hue and cry to save herself. It has further been submitted that the prosecution story is not probable and believable. The victim being a stranger lady would not travel with any stranger person. The victim was not aware about the father's name and address of the applicant. In such a condition it was not possible to victim to travel with the applicant. The statements of victim recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are not believable. The victim in her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that the applicant has cut my hand with knife and also burnt her with cigarette but no burn injury or cut injury has been found on the person of victim. The real fact is that the victim has left her house on her own sweet will. She was in love with one Sandeep and only to save Sandeep the victim has made false allegation against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 7.11.2017.
Per contra; learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the victim is minor. In medical certificate her age has been shown about 17 and 1/2 years. The victim in her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that she love with one Sandeep. On the saying of Sandeep she reached at the railway station. The applicant took her to Bihar where he kept her in a house of his friend and committed rape upon her. In her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has also made allegation of rape against the applicant. The victim has disclosed the name of applicant. The applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.
Consequently, the prayer for bail of the applicant is refused and the bail application of the applicant Chunna Lal @ Chunnilal is hereby rejected.
However, the trial court is directed to proceed with the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of eight months from the date of the production of the certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 8.5.2019
Masarrat
