High Court

Judgment

1. Heard Sri R.K.Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeev Verma, the learned A.G.A.-I for the State and Sri Ankit Tripathi, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the records.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2023, under Section 376/302 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station-

Mishrikh, District Sitapur.

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 26.05.2023 against four accused, including the applicant, his father and two brothers stating that the informant's daughter was returning after attending the call of nature from the boundary of a village along with another girl, the accused persons hanged her from a tree.

4. The post-mortem examination report mentions an oblique ligature mark present around the neck with a gap of 5.4 c.m. on left 2 side of neck. There was an abrasion of size 1cm x 0.5 cm present at forchette near hymen. The doctor has written that this sign was suggestive of use of forceful penetration of vagina. The cause of death has been opined to be asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging and samples were preserved for examination.

5. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 22 years having no criminal history, and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that all the three co-accused persons have already been granted bail and copies of their bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No. 15, 16 and 17 to the bail application.

7. The learned A.G.A. for the State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copy of the material collected during investigation. A copy of Forensic Examination Report submitted by Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Bhopal has been annexed with the counter affidavit, which mentions that vaginal swab taken from the dead body matched with the D.N.A. of the applicant and the applicant cannot be excluded as biological secretion contributor on vulval slide and swab of victim, cervical slide and swab of victim, vaginal slide and swab (for spermatozoa) and vaginal slide and swab (for DNA) of victim.

8. The applicant's involvement in another case has been disclosed in the counter affidavit, which has been explained in the rejoinder affidavit by stating that the applicant has been granted bail in that, which has been lodged after lodging of the present F.I.R. 3

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the opinion of Joint Director, State Medico Legal Cell, Lucknow, U.P. dated

04.09.2023, in which he has merely stated that ante-mortem hanging without injuries on appendages is always suicidal hanging. This opinion has been annexed with the counter affidavit filed by the State. The relevant extract of the Case-Diary annexed with the counter affidavit indicates that the Investigating Officer had put a question to the Joint Director, who has given the aforesaid opinion and he stated that he had submitted this opinion as per the post-mortem report and Forensic Science Laboratory report. He did not said anything else. This expert has not stated anything about the injury suffered by the victim on her private parts and he has not stated anything about findings of D.N.A. examination report and Swab reports, therefore, the opinion of Joint Director, State Medico Legal Cell, Lucknow, U.P. dated 04.09.2023, which has been given without taking into consideration the other relevant material available on record, is of no avail to the applicant.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that the girl, who is said to have accompanied the victim at the time of the incident has stated in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that while she and the victim were returning after attending the call of nature, she scaled a barred wire put around a field, but the victim got entangled in the wire, three boys Abhijeet (the applicant), Bhola @ Dilip and another boy whose name was not known to the minor witness, came there, they did not let the victim cross the wire. They started beating her. They slapped the witness and threatened her. The witness got frightened and ran away. After coming home, she told the parents of the victim about the incident and they went to look for her, 4 but she was not found on that spot, as the boys had taken her away. She stated that she had merely seen the three boys catching hold of the victim and she did not see anything thereafter.

11. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn attention of the Court to the statement of father of the deceased recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that the applicant was behind his daughter and when the applicant's father came to know about it, he had beaten up the applicant abusing him for having been involved with a girl of lower caste and had threatened him that if the applicant is seen with the victim, it will not be good. The informant had also scolded his daughter. On the date of incident, while his daughter was returning after attending the call of nature and the other girl accompanying her had come forward, the applicant caught hold of her and was committing the misdeed against her. His father reached the spot and saw them in objectionable condition and he hurled castes abuse insulting the victim. Thereafter, the dead body of informant's daughter was found hanging from a tree.

12. The aforesaid statement(s) of the girl who was accompanying the victim and father of the victim do not lend any help to the applicant. While refraining from making any further observations, which may affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the considered view, the aforesaid facts of the present case do not warrant exercise of discretion of this Court by enlarging the applicant on bail.

13. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Arvind [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

Mishrikh, District Sitapur.

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 26.05.2023 against four accused, including the applicant, his father and two brothers stating that the informant's daughter was returning after attending the call of nature from the boundary of a village along with another girl, the accused persons hanged her from a tree.

4. The post-mortem examination report mentions an oblique ligature mark present around the neck with a gap of 5.4 c.m. on left 2 side of neck. There was an abrasion of size 1cm x 0.5 cm present at forchette near hymen. The doctor has written that this sign was suggestive of use of forceful penetration of vagina. The cause of death has been opined to be asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging and samples were preserved for examination.

5. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 22 years having no criminal history, and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that all the three co-accused persons have already been granted bail and copies of their bail orders have been annexed as Annexure No. 15, 16 and 17 to the bail application.

7. The learned A.G.A. for the State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copy of the material collected during investigation. A copy of Forensic Examination Report submitted by Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Bhopal has been annexed with the counter affidavit, which mentions that vaginal swab taken from the dead body matched with the D.N.A. of the applicant and the applicant cannot be excluded as biological secretion contributor on vulval slide and swab of victim, cervical slide and swab of victim, vaginal slide and swab (for spermatozoa) and vaginal slide and swab (for DNA) of victim.

8. The applicant's involvement in another case has been disclosed in the counter affidavit, which has been explained in the rejoinder affidavit by stating that the applicant has been granted bail in that, which has been lodged after lodging of the present F.I.R. 3

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the opinion of Joint Director, State Medico Legal Cell, Lucknow, U.P. dated

04.09.2023, in which he has merely stated that ante-mortem hanging without injuries on appendages is always suicidal hanging. This opinion has been annexed with the counter affidavit filed by the State. The relevant extract of the Case-Diary annexed with the counter affidavit indicates that the Investigating Officer had put a question to the Joint Director, who has given the aforesaid opinion and he stated that he had submitted this opinion as per the post-mortem report and Forensic Science Laboratory report. He did not said anything else. This expert has not stated anything about the injury suffered by the victim on her private parts and he has not stated anything about findings of D.N.A. examination report and Swab reports, therefore, the opinion of Joint Director, State Medico Legal Cell, Lucknow, U.P. dated 04.09.2023, which has been given without taking into consideration the other relevant material available on record, is of no avail to the applicant.

10. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that the girl, who is said to have accompanied the victim at the time of the incident has stated in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that while she and the victim were returning after attending the call of nature, she scaled a barred wire put around a field, but the victim got entangled in the wire, three boys Abhijeet (the applicant), Bhola @ Dilip and another boy whose name was not known to the minor witness, came there, they did not let the victim cross the wire. They started beating her. They slapped the witness and threatened her. The witness got frightened and ran away. After coming home, she told the parents of the victim about the incident and they went to look for her, 4 but she was not found on that spot, as the boys had taken her away. She stated that she had merely seen the three boys catching hold of the victim and she did not see anything thereafter.

11. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn attention of the Court to the statement of father of the deceased recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that the applicant was behind his daughter and when the applicant's father came to know about it, he had beaten up the applicant abusing him for having been involved with a girl of lower caste and had threatened him that if the applicant is seen with the victim, it will not be good. The informant had also scolded his daughter. On the date of incident, while his daughter was returning after attending the call of nature and the other girl accompanying her had come forward, the applicant caught hold of her and was committing the misdeed against her. His father reached the spot and saw them in objectionable condition and he hurled castes abuse insulting the victim. Thereafter, the dead body of informant's daughter was found hanging from a tree.

12. The aforesaid statement(s) of the girl who was accompanying the victim and father of the victim do not lend any help to the applicant. While refraining from making any further observations, which may affect the outcome of the trial, I am of the considered view, the aforesaid facts of the present case do not warrant exercise of discretion of this Court by enlarging the applicant on bail.

13. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Arvind [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]