YOGENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Raj Bahadur Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State as well as Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

(2.) This application for bail has been filed on behalf of the accused-applicant Yogendra Singh @ Ramu involved in case crime no.192 of 2020, under sections 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC and section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mirzapur, District Shahjahanpur.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has not committed present offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that offences levelled in the matter are not attracted against the applicant. First information report was lodged by the brother of the victim. Victim was aged about 17 years. As per her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., she went from the house at her own free will. It is further submitted that statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. is recorded on the basis of advise and pressure. Had the applicant committed the present offence, this fact would have come in the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. itself. It is further argued that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 23.10.2020 having no criminal antecedents. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.