SHAILENDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

(2.) The allegation in the FIR, lodged by the father of the victim, is that in the night of 21/22.10.2017 his daughter Tara was sleeping in the house with her younger sister Sapna and at about 1.30 a.m. the accused Shailendra @ Sanju alonwith another person J.P. jumped over the wall of the house and came inside the house and opened the pajama of the victim and tried to rape her. The victims' sister who was sleeping beside her raised a hue and cry, the informant also woke up and raised an alarm, upon which the accused persons jumped over the wall and ran away. The informant's sister who was living in front of his house also woke up and tried to apprehend them but they made their escape good. The FIR.discloses that the age of the girl is 13 years. The report of the C.M.O. Hathras dated 25.10.2017 shows her age to be between 14 - 15 years, which means that she is a minor. The victim girl in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the FIR.version.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to previous enmity and he has no previous criminal history and the prosecution story is wholly unreliable.