HARIOM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the present prosecution of the applicant is an out-come of malicious vengeance that has been firing upon the applicant because of the conspicuous background that much before the said incident the mother of the applicant (Smt. Ram Lali) had lodged a case under Sections 379, 323,504 IPC and Section 4/10 of the Forest Act, against the husband of the victim, namely, Anand Pal and some others. This case was registered as Case Crime No. 527 of 2013 at P.S. Dataganj, District Badaun.

(3.) In this connection the victim husband, namely, Anand Pal, had been sent to jail and could be released on bail on 31.7.2015. Further submission is that being indignated by the same after he came out he has manipulated the present FIR against the applicant through his wife. Further submission is that though the present incident is said to have taken place on 16.8.2013 but no FIR was lodged with regard to the same and it was only after taking legal advice that an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved. Further submission is that even this application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 25.8.2015, that is to say, after about more than 10 days of the said occurrence. Further submission is that if actually the rape had been committed upon the victim, there is no explanation as to how and why the FIR was not lodged by the police and as to why she (first informant) took so much time to move an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Further submission is that the medical evidence lends no corroboration to the alleged allegation made against the applicant. It is argued that even according to the version of the FIR, no hue and cry was raised by her at the time of incident, while normally in a place where the incident is said to have been committed several villagers are supposed to remain present and actually if such type of incident would have happened, there must be some witnesses of the occurrence and the incident of rape could not have gone so completely unnoticed. Further submission is that the conspicuous background of enmity with the victim's husband and the fact of his coming out of jail soon before lodging of the present FIR are strong circumstances to indicate the malafide nature of the prosecution and indicates false implication of the applicant in the case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has 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. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.6.2016 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.