Muntiyaz vs State of U. P. - 2022 Supreme(All) 1346

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(All) 1346

MANISH MATHUR
Muntiyaz – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Vijaya Shankar Shukla.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH MATHUR, J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

2. Second bail application has been filed with first bail application having been rejected vide order dated 22.12.2021 by Hon. Ram Krishna Gautam, J. who has since demitted office and therefore the matter has been listed before this Court as per roster.

3. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

4. The applicant is involved in Case Crime No. 182 of 2021 under Section 376, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Faridpur, District Bareilly.

5. As per contents of F.I.R, the incident is said to have taken place on 20.04.2021 when the applicant is said to have committed rape upon wife of first informant.

6. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and first bail application of applicant has been rejected primarily on the ground that prosecutrix in her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the contents of F.I.R.

7. It is submitted that while rejecting the first bail application, this Court omitted to consider the medical report of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document