The Allahabad High Court in the case Mata Pher Rawat vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Civil Sect. Lko. And 3 Others observed wherein the bail was denied to the man who was being accused of committing rape against a 20-month-old infant while she was sleeping alone.
The bench headed by Justice Brij Raj Singh in the case observed and has rejected the second bail application moved by the accused that the victim received serious injuries on her private part.
The court in the case observed that it being evident that it has been indicated in the medical report that the private part of the victim was ruptured and vaginal bleeding is found, the summary discharge report also indicates that the victim received serious injuries on her private part that is why she was referred for surgery, therefore, the said crime appears to be very serious as the infant of about 20 months who was sleeping alone was raped by the applicant.
The counsel appearing for the accused applicant submitted before the court that on one in the case had seen the incident and the injuries received on the private part of the infant were due to the iron nail of the cot on which she was sleeping.
Further, it has been contended before the court that the medical report indicated that no opinion of sexual assault had been given by the doctor and no definite opinion of rape had been given and also no spermatozoa had been found on the body of the victim, thus, the prosecution case is not supported by the medical report.
It has been argued by the counsel before the court that .W.-1 i.e. the mother of the victim has stated that on the basis of doubt.
On the other hand, it has been submitted by the counsel appearing for the .G.A.-I appearing for the state argued before the court that the applicant committed rape on the infant when she was alone and when she raised the alarm, her family members reached the place of occurrence and as soon as the family members reached, the applicant ran away from the place of occurrence and therein, the P.W.-1 and his family members saw that there was bleeding from the private part of the victim.
Further, the AGA in the case drew the attention of the Court towards the discharge medical summary indicating that certain injuries were present on the private part of the victim.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated while considering the nature of allegations, and arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties.
Accordingly, the said court refused to grant him the bail.
The counsel, Advocates, Avinash Kumar Srivastava, Sunil Kumar Yadav appeared for the Applicant.
The counsel, Advocates, AGA Rajesh Kumar Singh represented the opposite party.