SONU Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.1302 of 2019, under Ss. 376-D, 323, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Shahabad, District Hardoi.

(3.) Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that in fact, initially an F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the applicants against son of the complainant and in retaliation, an application under Sec. 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved which was subsequently treated as a complaint case and after recording the statement of the alleged victim, summons have been issued though the learned trial court has failed to consider the fact that the statement of one of the eye witnesses goes contrary. He added that the witness has stated at the instance of her father and she did not see the incident. He also added that the story is improbable to some extent as two brothers are said to have committed rape. Further statements of the victim and eye witnesses have been recorded as such there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence and threatening the witnesses. He further submits that no custodial interrogation is required and the applicants are undertaking that they will co-operate with the investigating proceedings and they will remain present before the Investigating Officer as and when required. He further submits that the applicants have no previous criminal history and they are law abiding citizens and they have acute apprehension of being arrested by the police, as such, they may be granted anticipatory bail which they will not misuse.