SANT RAJ Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

(2.) The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.8 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Turkpatti, District Kushinagar.

(3.) According to the F.I.R. version, victim was taken away by her Bua and victim of her own sweet will solemnized marriage with co-accused, Chhote Lal, in temple thereafter, co-accused, Chhote Lal, raped her. Applicant's counsel submitted that the applicant is Fufa of the victim and no role has been assigned against the applicant in F.I.R. It is further submitted that the informant had borrowed Rs.34,000/- from the applicant and on demanding the money back, the informant lodged a false F.I.R. against the applicant to settle the matter. He next contended that the victim of her own sweet will solemnized marriage with co-accused, Chhote Lal, in presence of family members and proceedings under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act is pending. Statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. are not corroborating the version of F.I.R. and medical report. He further contended that co-accused, namely, Chhote Lal, who has been assigned main role in F.I.R., has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.10.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31505 of 2020, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.12.2019.