GAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri A.P.Singh Raghav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P., Sri Jai Singh Chandel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant and perused the record.

(2.) THIS bail application has been filed by Gajendra Singh with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 239 of 2009 under sections 396, 376, 412 I.P.C., Police Station Arnia, District Bulandshahar.

(3.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR, the alleged offence has been committed by unknown miscreants, the applicant has not been put up for identification, the injured Smt. Brijesh had given a contrary version during investigation on 13.8.2009, the statement of Smt. Brijesh was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. which is not in consonance with her statement recorded by I.O. under section 161 Cr.P.C. by the I.O. and a new story of rape has also been added whereas according to FIR and her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. by the I.O.there was no allegation regarding the rape but after great thought and consultation she made the allegation against the applicant that he had committed the rape with her, again her statement was recorded on 19.8.2009 in that statement she made statement regarding the rape, thereafter she was medically examined on 14.8.2009 on the medical examination report no recent injuries could be detected, according to the supplementary medical report dated 31.8.2009, no spermatozoa dead or alive was found in vaginal smear and no definite opinion about raped could be given. There was a dispute between the applicant and the deceased in favour of the sale of mobile phone on account of that dispute the applicant and other co-accused persons have been falsely implicated in the present case, the applicant is not having any criminal antecedent, he is in jail since 14.8.2009, he may be released on bail.