KHUSHI RAM Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Abhay Raj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Darwari Lal, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

(2.) This is the second bail application moved on behalf of applicant. His first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dtd. 19/7/2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11836 of 2022.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of first bail application, the trial has commenced. Learned counsel further submits that charges were framed on 5/4/2022 and out of 15 prosecution witness only five prosecution witnesses have deposed their evidence in trial, i.e., P.W.1-the victim, P.W.2-mother of the victim, P.W.3-Chandra Pal (cousin of complainant), P.W.4 H.C.P. Veer Pal and the first informant as P.W.5 and it appears that some more time would elapse in conclusion of trial. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that though the victim in her statement recorded under Sec. 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has clearly stated that on the date of incident when she went out of her house for throwing water the applicant came there and caught her from behind, thereafter, he took her in jungle where he committed her rape, but in the trial the victim in her cross-examination has specifically stated that she had not seen who caught her from behind, which statement has been filed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Thus, learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there are material contradictions in between the deposition of the victim before the trial court as well as in the statements of victim recorded earlier under Sec. 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., thus, it is argued that there is bleak chance that prosecution may prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the applicant may be convicted. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 23/12/2021, having no criminal history and has already undergone a substantial period of incarceration, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail sympathetically.