SACHIN Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL bail applications have been filed qua FIR No. 19 of 2014 dated 21.1.2014 registered under Sections 363, 342, 376D, 323, 201 and 511 IPC and Sections 6 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012. All bail applications are consolidated and disposed of by same order in order to avoid repetition.

(2.) IT is pleaded that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in present case. It is further pleaded that investigation of the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed in the month of March 2014 and it is further pleaded that no recovery is to be effected from the applicants. It is also pleaded that both FIRs No. 23 of 2014 dated 20.01.2014 and 19 of 2014 dated 21.01.2014 are contradictory to each other. It is further pleaded that as per FIR No. 23 of 2014 occurrence took place at Hotel Monal Mandi and as per FIR No. 19 occurrence took place in the house of prosecutrix at Dharampur which is approximately at a distance of 90 Kms. and hence prosecution story did not inspire any confidence. It is further pleaded that statement of complainant was recorded on 28.1.2014 wherein complainant stated before learned Magistrate that except co -accused Ravi all four accused have committed rape upon her in the intervening night of 17.1.2014 while fifth co -accused Ravi attempted to commit rape with other prosecutrix. It is pleaded that on contrary as per statement of other prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before learned Magistrate co -accused Beer committed rape with other prosecutrix and she did not name any other co -accused involved in the criminal offence. It is pleaded that even other prosecutrix has not stated anything qua attempt of rape with her. It is further pleaded that in view of contradictory statements of both prosecutrix no offence under IPC and POCSO Act is made out. It is pleaded that neither identification of accused persons established nor any test identification parade was conducted. It is further pleaded that medical examination of prosecutrix was conducted on dated 21.1.2014 when first FIR was lodged at Mandi and as per medical certificate no rape or attempt to rape was committed and further pleaded that MLC of complainant did not suggest any injury on any part of the body of prosecutrix except small abrasion on right little finger. It is pleaded that deep rooted conspiracy has been hatched against accused persons. It is pleaded that applicants will join the investigation of the case as and when required and applicants will not tamper with prosecution witnesses in any manner. Prayer for acceptance of bail applications is sought.

(3.) COURT heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State and also perused the record.