SANDEEP CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per office report dated 30.7.2020, notice has been served upon the opposite party no.2, but no response was filed on his behalf.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. In fact scuffle took place between the parties on the occasion of Saraswati Pooja due to which frivolous FIR has been lodged against the applicant. In the statements of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., there is allegation of rape against the applicant which is not getting support from the medical report dated 3.2.2020, according to which, hymen is intact. Applicant is having no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 6.2.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.