Ravindra Singh - (1.) -This application is filed by the applicant Mukesh with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 66 of 2006, under Section 376/302, I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (v) of S.C. and S.T. (P.A.) Act, P.S. Hafizpur, district Ghaziabad.
(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Jogendra Singh on 30.6.2006 at 4.00 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 30.6.2006 at about 2.45 p.m., the distance of the police station was about 9 kms. from the alleged place of the occurrence, the applicant was named in the F.I.R. It is alleged that the deceased Km. Monika, aged about 11 years, was asked to brought the meal at the agricultural field where the first informant and his wife were working. When she did not come up to 2.00 p.m., consequently the first informant and his wife became too much worried and they came to their house and enquired about the deceased Km. Monika where they were apprised that she had gone taking the meal at about 12 O'clock in day, thereafter the first informant and others come out in search of deceased and they found the meal wrapped in clothe near the tubewell of the applicant and they shouted to get a response of the deceased. On their shouting, the applicant came out from his sugarcane field, having doubt and suspicion the first informant and other persons entered into that sugarcane field and found the dead body of the deceased. At that time, the chhaddhi of the deceased was embedded on her mouth and there were profused bleeding from her private part. THE deceased was murdered after committing the rape. According to the post-mortem examination report, the deceased had received two incised wounds and a lacerated wound through and through at hymen, during investigation on 5.7.2006 at the pointing out of the applicant, the blood stained darati was taken out from the room of tubewell. Heard Sri G. S. Chaturvedi, senior advocate, assisted by Sri Murtaza Ali and Sri A. P. S. Raghav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and Sri Ashtosh Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no direct eye-witness account, the prosecution story is false, concocted and highly improbable, the applicant has been falsely implicated only because near his tubewell the meal brought by the deceased was recovered, the recovery has been planted. The applicant was having no motive and intention to commit the alleged offence. The applicant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence but only on account of doubt and suspicion, he has been falsely implicated.
(3.) IN reply of the above contention, it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant that the applicant was seen when he was coming out from the sugarcane field where the dead body of the deceased was recovered. IN the present case, the deceased is a minor girl, first of all she was raped, thereafter she was murdered by using darati, the prosecution story is fully corroborated with the post mortem examination report which indicates that the deceased was raped and thereafter she was done to death and at the pointing out of the applicant, the blood stained darati has been recovered. It is a very heinous offence and applicant is serving in Police Department. There was no reason of his false implication. IN case, he is released on bail, he shall tamper with the evidence. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and considering the gravity of the offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail, the prayer for bail is refused.;