SATYAVEER Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

(2.) Perused the record.

(3.) Submission of counsel for the applicant is that actually the victim Somwati is a major girl and the Radiological report does not indicate her correct age. Counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to the medical examination of the girl in which all features of a grown up girl has been observed and noted by the doctor. Counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to the Parivar Register which has been annexed as Annexure-7 to the bail application. According to which, the date of birth of the girl Somwati is 2.6.1993. This Parivar Register relates to the village of the applicant and in the Parivar Register of that village, the name of the victim has been entered as wife of Satyaveer. Counsel has further drawn the attention of the Court to the statement given by the girl to the Investigating Officer in which in so many words she admitted that she was carrying on relationship with the applicant since about one year back and she herself called the applicant so that she may go away with him. It was also admitted by the girl that she herself left her house and went to Arel Ghat, from where she had gone to the house of the applicant along with him and lived there as husband and wife and contracted marriage with the applicant on her own volition. It is also pointed out by counsel for the applicant that the medical examination of the girl does not indicate any mark of injury on her body which may show any coercion or resistance. Counsel for the applicant has also drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the girl given before the Magistrate in which she has expressed her desire to live with the applicant and has stated that her father has falsely implicated the applicant. It was also admitted by the girl in the statement given before the Magistrate that she had contracted marriage with the applicant. Counsel has further drawn the attention of the Court to the order passed by the Magistrate with regard to the custody of the victim girl, who after perusing the entire record and statement of the girl, had thought it fit to handover the custody of the girl to the father of the applicant where, according to the counsel, she is still living. Submission of the counsel is that as this relationship is not acceptable to the parents of the girl, therefore, a false and frivolous case has been fastened upon the applicant. It was next submitted that the other five co-accused persons against whom the allegations of taking away the victim girl were made, they have already been found innocent and a final report has been submitted in their favour. Lastly, it was submitted that the applicant has already spent two years in jail and is languishing behind the bars since 16.08.2013 having no criminal history and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.