AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, J. - (1.) This application on behalf of the State has been filed praying for cancellation of the bail order whereby bail has been granted on 25.4.2017 to the three opposite parties arrayed herein, namely, Gayatri Prasad Prajapati, Vikas Verma and Amrendra Singh alias Pinto Singh, in relation to Case Crime No. 29 of 2017 under Section 376 D/376/511/504/506 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Gautam Palli, District Lucknow. The FIR in this case was lodged on 18.2.2017 after the complainant/victim-Savita Pathak had approached the Apex Court in Writ Petition No. 160 of 2016 where the following order was passed:- JUDGEMENT_177_LAWS(ALL)5_20171.html The First Information Report alleges the commission of the offences under the Sections referred to herein above against the present complainant-Savita Pathak and her daughter-Ananya Pathak. It has been alleged that the offences under the aforesaid Sections had been committed after demonstrating some intoxicant substances and obscene photographs of the informant had been clicked, on the basis whereof the victim was being blackmailed. The sum and substance of the allegations was of outraging the modesty of the victim-Savita Pathak as well as her daughter, and was also threatened with dire consequences. The statement of both the victims were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and also under Section 164 Cr.P.C. No arrest had been carried out as a result whereof non-bailable warrants were issued, and it was after a lapse of one month of lodging of the FIR that all the three accused aforesaid who have been granted bail were arrested on 14.3.2017.
(2.) A joint application for grant of bail was moved on behalf of all the three opposite parties supported by a single affidavit of one Vyas Verma, who is stated to be the real brother of one of the co-accused, namely, opposite party No. 2-Vikas Verma. The said bail application clearly denies the incidents narrated in the FIR with a further recital that no complaint was ever made to the higher officials. It is also alleged that the victim is trying to blackmail the opposite parties-accused and it appears that being a corporator, from ward No. 10 at Chitrakoot, she has political ambitions. The bail application further indicates that the victim had earlier lodged FIRs against other persons as well, to harass them, but in the present case, once the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded and the daughter of the complainant had clearly denied any such incident having taking place, there was absolutely no evidence on the basis whereof the opposite parties could have been prosecuted or even arrested. In such circumstances, bail was prayed for. The said bail application, even though is dated 22.4.2017, came to be presented and was registered on 24.4.2017 with notice to the Government Council, was directed to come up on 25.4.2017.
(3.) On 25.4.2017, an application was moved by the Circle Officer of Hazratganj, District Lucknow, who was also the Investigating Officer praying before the Court concerned to grant three days time for obtaining documents and filing para-wise response to the bail application. The adjournment was sought on the ground of the engagement of the Investigating Officer in other administrative VIP duty as well as being involved in controlling law and order situation in the wake of certain protest and Dharnas within his area of duty.;