Court No. - 51 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18251 of 2010 Petitioner :- Dhangu @ Shyam Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- R.S. Shukla Respondent Counsel :- Govt Advocate Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the
record.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that
there was inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. and there is no plausible
explanation for the same. He further submits that the age of the prosecutrix, as
per the medical report, is shown to be about 18 years and no definite opinion
about rape has been given by the Doctor. He further submits that no injury,
either external or on the private parts of the prosecutrix, was found. He further
submits that the only allegation against the applicant is that he facilitated
elopement of the prosecutix along with co accused Ismail. He further submits
that no role of committing rape on the prosecutrix has been attributed to the
applicant. He further submits that as per the statements of the prosecutrix the
main allegation of committing rape is against the co accused Ismail with
whom love affair of the prosecutrix was already going on for about one and
half years prior to the alleged incident. He further submits that the prosecutrix
is major and she remained in the company of the co accused Ismail for many
days voluntarily and visited various places but did not raise any alarm or hue
and cry. He further submits that if the prosecutrix had not gone along with the
co accused Ismail out of her own will and volition, she would have raised
alarm and hue and cry while visiting various places in his company but she
did not do so and this fact itself indicates that she was a consenting party. He
further submits that the applicant has neither assisted nor played any role in
the elopement of the prosecutrix with the co accused and has been falsely
implicated. Referring to para 14 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail
application, he further submits that a criminal proceeding vide case No.
167/07, under sections 323,504,363,366,376 I.P.C., which was filed by the
applicant against the informant’s side, is already pending between the parties
and as a counter blast to the that proceeding, the present prosecution has been
launched against the applicant malafide with a view to harass and exert
pressure on him. He further submits that the applicant has got no criminal
history to his credit and there are no chances of his fleeing away from the
judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence,and is in jail since
26.4.2010.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the
accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for
the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Dhangu alias Shyam Lal involved in Case Crime No. 49 of
2010 under Sections 363,366,376,342,120B I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act ,
P.S.Shankargarh , District Allahabad be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i)The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurise/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii)The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions , the court below shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 16.7.2010
MLK