SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(All) 504

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Krishan Pahal, J.
Sandeep Kumar Mishra – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. – Opposite Party
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 32824 of 2020, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 12486 of 2022
Decided On : 16-02-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Pulak Ganguly, Virendra Kumar Mishra
For the Opposite Party : Shivam Yadav

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 376-D, 342 and 506 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 162, 161, 164 – Indian Evidence Act – Section 114-A – Learned counsels for applicants learned counsel for informant as well learned A.G.A. for State bail applications arise out of same incident they are being decided by this common order – Held, Court Considering circumstances of case submissions made by learned counsel for parties evidence on record taking into consideration inordinate delay in lodging of FIR by informant fact that trial is at its conclusive end and without expressing any opinion on merits of case – Court applicants have made out a case for bail – Indian society has undergone a complete change during said period of more often observed that false implication in sexual offences is on a rise inordinate delay in lodging FIR is to be considered time of adjudicating bail – Applications are allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, Shri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsels for the applicants and Shri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Since these bail applications arise out of the same incident, they are being decided by this common order.

3. The present bail applications have been filed by the applicants in Case Crime No.511 of 2019, under Sections 376-D, 342 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rohaniya, District Varanasi, with the prayer to enlarge them on bail.

PROSECUTION STORY:

4. As per the prosecution story, a first information report was lodged at P.S. Daurala, District Meerut stating that the informant is a resident of village Machchari, P.S. Daurala and is connected to Param Dham Nyas, Arihantpuram, Valeedpur, Daurala and his wife aged about 24 years alongwith other colleagues is living at Baroranpur, P.S. Rohaniya, Varanasi for the last one year. She travels off and on to Meerut and Varanasi for the works of the organization. At Varanasi, the informant and his wife used to live in a rental house of one Sushil Patel. On 18.06.2019, the informant had come to Meerut and his wife along with other colleagues of the organization were left behind at Varanasi. On 03.08.2019, the wife of the informant came to Meerut from Varanasi and told him about the incident which happened with her at Varanasi. She told the informant that on 01.07.2019 at about 10:00 AM, Chandan Kumar s/o Ram Narayan and Sandeep s/o of Dev Kumar Mishra had raped her in her room. When she had tried to raise alarm, Sandeep is stated to have closed her mouth with his hand. After sometime one Ankit s/o Satveer is said to have reached there, at which the accused persons had left the room and Ankit is said to have slapped Chandan, but the duo is said to have escaped on their motorcycle. When the informant asked the said perpetrators of crime about the incident, they are said to have threatened him that he alongwith his wife shall be ruined by them. The said application was moved at the police station on 05.08.2019 and it was registered at Case crime No.349 of 2019 under Sections 376-D, 342, 506 I.P.C. at P.S. Daurala, District Meerut.

5. The said FIR was sent to be investigated by the police of P.S. Rohaniya, District Varanasi on a letter sent by S.S.P., Meerut as the matter fell within the jurisdiction of District Varanasi. The F.I.R. was lodged at FIR No. 511 of 2019 at P.S. Rohaniya on 09.09.2019.

RIVAL CONTENTIONS:

For Applicants:

6. Learned counsels for the applicants have stated that the victim was medically examined at District Hospital, Varanasi on 12.09.2019 and no internal or external injury was found on her body to corroborate the prosecution allegations. The statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are in verbatim of the allegations levelled in the FIR. Learned counsels have further stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case as they had enquired about the illegal activities being undertaken by the victim and other activists of the Ashram. The story has been cooked up just to harass the applicants and to dissuade them from bringing forward their illegal activities.

7. Learned counsels have further stated that the prosecution had created additional evidence by introducing new witnesses and filed their affidavits before S.S.P., Meerut, which is hit by Section 162 Cr.P.C. and are not admissible in law. Learned counsels have further stated that one of the witness Smt. Sanjana had even filed another affidavit on 23.09.2019, sworn at Meerut, denying the contents of her earlier affidavit. The said affidavit has been annexed as annexure no.7 to the Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.23824 of 2020. Learned counsels have further stated that it is pertinent to mention that prior to 06.08.2019, no other first information report was lodged by any

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top