Rinkesh Alias Bablu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46582 of 2023 Applicant :- Rinkesh Alias Bablu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Misra,Ravindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 229 of 2023 at Police Station-Majhola, District-Moradabad under Sections 376, 376D, 377, 342, 420, 366, 504, 506, 495 IPC and Section 5/6 Immoral Prostitution Act. The applicant is in jail since 13.06.2023. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 23.08.2023. The following arguments made by Shri Ravindra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel and Shri Sunil Kumar Misra, learned counsels on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶1Delay in lodgement of the F.I.R. in the facts and circumstances of this case is fatal to the prosecution case.

¶2The victim and the applicant were in a relationship.

¶3The F.I.R. is the result of a relationship between the applicant and victim going awry.

¶4The applicant never gave a plighted word to marry the victim.

¶5The criminal case is being leveraged to extort money from the applicant.

¶6Medical evidence to corroborate commission of rape by the applicant with the victim has not been produced by the prosecution.

¶7The victim was never confined or bound down in any manner. She did not raise an alarm nor did she resist the applicant. Her conduct shows that she was a consenting party.

¶8The victim is habitual of lodging false criminal cases where she had lodged an F.I.R. of a similar nature.

¶9Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶10Learned AGA contends that the applicant has criminal history of one more case apart from the instant case. Rejoining this issue, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is in jail. He does not have an effective pairokar. He has been abandoned by his near and dear one after his incarceration. Hence details of the status of the said criminal case could not be obtained and stated in the first instance in the bail application. However, on the basis of records available with the learned AGA and the upon instructions from the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. He was falsely framed in the said case. The said case does not depict commission of any heinous crime and has no bearing on the instant bail application.

¶11The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Rinkesh Alias Bablu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. Order Date :- 2.11.2023/Dhananjai High Court of Judicature at Allahabad