No Direct Rape Allegation; Victim Refused Medical-Examination: Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Rape Accused
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a rape accused observing that the victim had not made any direct allegation regarding the committal of rape and refused medical examination.
The accused had argued that he was falsely implicated in the case due to enmity and “village party-bandi.” The accused submitted that the allegations levelled against him in the FIR under Section 376 of the IPC or other charges were an outcome of the pressure created by the villagers and family members of the victim.
A Single Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed, “After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that there is no direct allegation of rape in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and the victim refused for her medical-examination…this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.”
Advocate Kunwar Ravi Prakash represented the applicant, while A.G.A. Chaaru Singh appeared for the opposite party.
The FIR lodged against the accused alleged that he had committed various offences, including rape, against the victim. However, the accused contended that the victim and he were in a love affair and that the FIR was lodged only after the victim's parents discovered their relationship. The accused argued that the victim did not level any direct allegations of rape in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. and that she refused to undergo her medical examination.
The accused argued that once the victim denied her medical examination, the allegation levelled by her and the chargesheet submitted under Section 376 of the I.P.C. was nothing but an abuse of the process of law.
The Court stated that there was no direct allegation of rape in the victim's statements and that the victim had refused medical examination. The Court also noted that the accused had been in jail since 2023 and that there was no likelihood of an early conclusion of the trial.
The Bench granted bail to the accused on the condition that he executes a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. The Court also imposed several conditions on the bail, including that the applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence, will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the trial court, and will cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
“Let the applicant involved in Case Under Section: 354/504/506/436/427/376/511/452 I.P.C.; Police Station Ram Nagar, District: Barabanki, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned,” the Court held.
Consequently, the Court clarified that “in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the trial court shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the application.
Cause Title: Pintu Singh Alias Sudhir Singh v. State Of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:43046)
Appearance:
Applicant: Advocates Kunwar Ravi Prakash and Vijay Pratap Singh
Opposite Parties: A.G.A. Chaaru Singh
