Indal Chauhan vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 8871 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 77
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33732 of 2020
 

 
Applicant :- Indal Chauhan
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Yadav,Varun Kumar Chaubey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Daya Shanker Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.168 of 2018, under Sections 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, police station - Turkpatti, District- Kushinagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Allegation of rape levelled against applicant is thoroughly false. The victim has not sustained any injury and that as per ossification test, age of victim girl was shown 18 years.

4 Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application No. 6586 of 2019 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2020, and thereafter statements of all the witnesses have been recorded before the trial court. Referring to the statements of victim girl and her family members, it is submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 04.06.2018 and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in the trial.

5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer of bail and argued that the trial court has already heard final argument and now the case is fixed for pronouncing the judgment and at this stage, it would not be just and appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation and all attending facts and circumstances of case, particularly the fact that the trial of the case is at fag end, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant Indal Chauhan is hereby rejected.

7. However, keeping in view period of incarceration of applicant, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same at the earliest.

Order Date :- 24.3.2023

S.K.S.