Allahabad High Court High Court

Ratan Lal @ Neta vs State Of U.P. on 30 June, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Ratan Lal @ Neta vs State Of U.P. on 30 June, 2010
                                                                      Court No. 20

                    Criminal Misc Case No. 4873 (B) of 2010

Ratan Lal @ Neta                                                     Applicant
                                        Vs
State of U.P                                                         Opp. Party

Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The accused-applicant Ratan Lal @ Neta is involved in Case Crime No.
760 of 2009, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., from Police Station Purwa,
District Unnao.

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that accused
applicant is neither named by the complainant in the FIR nor by the prosecutrix in
her statement recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C. She
for the first time named the accused applicant in her statement recorded under
Section 164 Cr.P.C by the Magistrate. The prosecutrix in her statement recorded
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate narrated a different story as narrated
in her statement recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
Co-accused Kallu, who too was neither named in the FIR nor in the statement of
prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C,. has already been ordered to be
released on bail vide detailed and reasoned order dated 23.03.2010 passed by
another Bench of this Court in Crl Misc Case No. 933 of 2010 especially on the
ground that the statement of prosecutrix recorded by the Investigating Officer
under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was not consistent with her statement recorded by the
Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The case of the accused applicant is
identical to the case of co-accused Kallu, who has already been ordered to be
released on bail. Therefore, accused applicant also deserves to be released on bail.

Learned A.G.A opposed the bail application.

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and
the learned Additional Government Advocate. Keeping in view the totality of the
facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that co-accused having
identical case as the present accused applicant, has already been ordered to be
released on bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, accused
applicant may be released on bail.

Let applicant Ratan Lal @ Neta be released on bail in aforesaid case crime
number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

30.06.2010
Renu/-