RAKESH KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 83 of 2016, under Section 376, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., P.S.- Phoolpur, District- Allahabad, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix Rita Devi Yadav is a married lady and is the neighbour of the applicant. He next submitted that she had lodged the F.I.R. against the applicant on 26.03.2016 falsely alleging therein that he had committed rape on her and tried to rape her thrice between 21.12.2015 and 26.01.2016. He next submitted that from the facts stated by the prosecutrix in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. (Annexure No. 5), it transpires that she is a consenting party and the impugned F.I.R. was lodged by her after she was caught with the applicant in a compromising position. In her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has alleged that the applicant had prepared a video clip of her showing her nude but neither any video clip has been recovered nor the prosecutrix has herself seen the video clip. The medical evidence on record does not corroborate the prosecution theory of rape at all. He further submitted that the applicant who has no criminal antecedents to his credit and is in jail since 30.04.2016, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.?