High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Vijendra v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5921 of 2004  RD-AH 8602 (7 May 2007)
Court No. 44
Criminal Appeal No. 5921 of 2004
Vijendra ..... Appellant
State of U.P. ......Opp. Party
Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.
Hon'ble Shiv Charan, J.
A prayer for bail is made out on behalf of the appellant who has been convicted by the trial court in S.T. No. 1798 of 1999 (State Vs. Vijendra) under Sections 376(2)(f) I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 25,000/-.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the lower court record as well as the order of Sessions Judge.
According to the prosecution case, on 8.4.1999 at about 4.00 P.M. the victim was playing in front of her house. The appellant took away the victim who was aged about 6 years on the pretext of giving her Kancha. The informant, mother of the victim, started searching her and she heard shrieks of her daughter. She raised alarm and accused fled away. The victim was found in a pool of blood. The victim has been taken to the hospital and thereafter report was lodged at the police station. The eye witness account is also corroborated by the medical evidence. The allegation against the appellant is that he committed rape upon the victim.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is delay in lodging the first information report and P.W. 4 Dr. Smt. Sudha Rani, who had medically examined the victim, found the hymen torn fresh. It was further argued that report was lodged after about 48 hours and hymen should not have been found torn fresh. It is further submitted that blood was also found on her private part. It is further submitted that there was no explanation about the delay in lodging the report and there are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses.
On the contrary learned A.G.A. submits that the allegations of rape are corroborated by the medical evidence and there is no motive for falsely implicating the appellant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, it is not a fit case for grant of bail.
Accordingly the prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected.
Dated : 7.5.2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.