LAKHANDAR PATEL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by prosecutrix herself, she is 18 years old, resident of Ghazipur, had gone by bus from Kanpur to Ghazipur to meet her Nani and during travel developed friendship with the Bus Conductor, the applicant, also obtained his mobile number and after meeting her Nani, she called the conductor and reached Ghazipur Bus Stand at 6:00 p.m., who committed rape on her and taken her to Varanasi and again attempted rape; that in her statements under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has repeated the same story and also stated that applicant assured her of marriage but disappeared; that no date or time of incident has been mentioned in the F.I.R.; that there are material contradictions in the statements of prosecutrix under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and they are also in contradiction with the averments made in F.I.R.; that the prosecutrix is major and matured girl and her radiological age has been determined between 18-19 years; that since the prosecutrix during travel from Kanpur to Ghazipur had requested the applicant that she is in need of money and cannot buy a ticket, the applicant provided her help, upon which she got infatuated with the applicant and started putting pressure on him for making marriage and when he disclosed that he is already married, having a child and cannot make marriage with her, she has falsely implicated him; that the entire prosecution story is absolutely false, baseless and highly improbable; that the medical examination report does not support the prosecution case and committal of rape with her; that the applicant did not commit rape on the prosecutrix either inside the bus at Ghazipur or at Varanasi Bus Stand or at any place whatsoever; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 26.6.2017.

(3.) Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.