Inordinate delay in reporting a crime and contradictions in the victim's statements can create reasonable doubt, justifying the grant of bail.

ORDER :

(FARJAND ALI, J.)

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record.

5. The victim is a 35 years old grown-up married lady having 17 years old girl. Though she made allegations of subjecting her to penetrative sexual assault by the petitioner but the circumstances revealing from the case persuading this Court to tentatively believe upon the plea raised on behalf of the accused that a false case has been foisted. To assert the above Shri Nishant Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court towards the fact that the FIR was lodged on 07.12.2023 for an incident which took place on 22.11.2023. The FIR reveals that during the course of crime, her daughter Kailashi had rushed to the spot. The FIR further revealing that the fact of incident had been very well informed to all the family members. Had it been the case then what was the reason for causing inordinate delay in reporting the matter to the police is a serious question to ponder. There is a substance in the submission of Shri Nishant Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner that inordinate delay without any cogent explanation give rise to a reasonable suspicion over the truthfulness and genuineness of the allegations and the possibility of concoction, embellishment and false implication cannot be ruled out. The interesting part of the matter would be that though she made allegations in her statement before the Magistrate but when she was examined during investigation under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. on 7.12.2023, she totally denied from the allegations of subjecting her to rape. She now has been examined in the trial as PW-1 and when confronted with her previous statement by marking the document as D-1, she made an evasive reply for which learned counsel states for the petitioner states that the above fact has made her a totally unreliable witness. The petitioner is behind the bars since 22.12.2023. The victim has now been examined in the trial. Therefore, the possibility of hampering or tampering is ruled out. No fruitful purpose would be served by incarcerated him for a further period. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

6. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.