The court granted bail due to significant doubts regarding the reliability of forensic evidence and procedural delays, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and integrity in evidence handling.

JUDGMENT :

Krishan Pahal, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Counter affidavits filed by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant respectively are taken on record.

3. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.69 of 2021, under Sections 376, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kurra, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial.

PROSECUTION STORY:

5. The FIR was instituted by the informant/victim that she was 15 years old and had gone to ease herself out at about 7:30 p.m. on 24.03.2021, whereby she was caught hold off by the applicant alongwith one another unknown person and was beaten up and raped by him and thereupon ran away from the place of occurrence.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

6. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.

7. The FIR is delayed by about eighteen hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

8. There is no medical corroboration of the incident as no injuries were found on the body of the victim.

9. The medical examination of the victim was conducted on 25.03.2021 at about 4:00 p.m. The vaginal swab and slides of the victim were prepared and were sent for forensic analysis.

10. The victim has reiterated the allegations made in the FIR, but has changed the time of offence to 8:00 p.m. She has also stated the time to be 8:00 p.m. in her statement recorded by the doctor conducting her medical examination.

11. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 is filled up with embellishments as she has introduced another name and developed story stating that she was threatened by the applicant and co-accused person.

12. At this stage, she has reverted back to the time of offence mentioned in FIR i.e. 7:30 p.m.

13. The victim has introduced two witnesses to the incident and has also stated that her medical examination was conducted after she had changed her clothes.

14. The supplementary report was prepared by the doctor conducting medical examination of the victim and according to it, no spermatozoa was detected in the smear, as such, no sexual violence was subjected to her.

15. The clothes of the victim were recovered by the Investigating Officer on 25.03.2021 itself and he did not observe any stains on the underwear and lower of the victim at the time they were sealed.

16. In the pathology report, no spermatozoa was detected in the vaginal smear of the victim.

17. The said forensic science laboratory report dated 27.04.2024 indicated as follows:-

(i) On underwear of the victim, human blood was found, but no spermatozoa was found.

(ii) On the lower of the victim, spermatozoa was found, but an anomalous and vague inference has been mentioned in it stating that either blood or spermatozoa was of human origin.

18. The said report is tainted one as it does not indicate the details of the procedure undertaken in testing the same.

19. The victim and her father had submitted an affidavit before the S.S.P., Mainpuri that the applicant had not committed any offence with her and she was major and her age was deliberately suppressed. She has further stated in the said application that the FIR was instituted at the directions of the villagers. The