IN THE COURT OF Name of the court
Ld. Special Judge (P.C. Act), CBI, Name of the court
Bail Application No. Bail application number of 2016
IN THE MATTER OF:
Applicant's name
S/o Applicant's father's name
R/o Applicant's address,
Applicant's address (line 2): APPLICANT
VERSUS
Respondent's name (State): RESPONDENT
FIR No. FIR number
U/S: Sections of the FIR
P.S.: Police station
Accused in judicial custody since: Date of judicial custody of the accused
BAIL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 439 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT Applicant's name S/O Applicant's father's name IN FIR NO. FIR number UNDER SECTIONS Sections of the FIR REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION Police station.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.That the applicant/accused is a peace-loving citizen of India, an honest young man with deep roots in society.
2.That the applicant is a young man who has been deliberately, falsely and out of vengeance implicated in the captioned case without any fault on his part, only because the prosecutrix had fallen in love with him and wished to marry him.
3.That the applicant/accused is a student.
4.That the FIR in the present case came to be registered by the prosecutrix on Date of registration of the FIR.
A.That it is stated by the prosecutrix that she was studying in Class/standard in which the prosecutrix was studying and that approximately Period of acquaintance between the applicant and the prosecutrix ago she met the applicant at Place where the applicant met the prosecutrix, and thereafter the prosecutrix and the applicant regularly spoke to each other on the phone, in the course of which they became friends. During that period, the applicant proposed marriage to the prosecutrix, and the prosecutrix accepted the proposal.
B.That it is further stated by the prosecutrix that the applicant established physical relations with her forcibly on the assurance of marriage, as a result of which she became pregnant. The prosecutrix informed the applicant of the same and asked him to marry her, but the applicant kept taking excuses and giving assurances that he would marry her soon, today or tomorrow. The applicant then forcibly administered unwanted pills to the prosecutrix, resulting in a miscarriage. However, when the prosecutrix continued to ask about the marriage and pressed him to marry her, the applicant refused to marry her. Thereafter, the prosecutrix lodged the present FIR.
5.That the prosecutrix and the applicant fell in love with each other. The prosecutrix even started exchanging messages with and meeting the applicant.
6.That the applicant/accused did not commit rape upon the prosecutrix. The present case is a sheer act of vengeance by the father of the prosecutrix, who prevailed upon his daughter to make a false statement; the applicant/accused has also been falsely implicated in the present case.
7.That there is not even an iota of evidence collected by the investigating officer to show that the applicant/accused raped the prosecutrix. Even prima facie, there is nothing to show commission of the offence under sections Sections of the FIR.
8.That the accused has been falsely implicated in the above-noted case, and the allegations made therein are false, fabricated, mala fide and unfounded, and shall have no legs to stand upon at the conclusion of the trial, as the accused/applicant is an innocent person and has not committed any offence whatsoever.
9.That the applicant is filing the present bail application before this Hon'ble Court on the following, amongst other, grounds, which are taken without prejudice to one another:
-: GROUNDS :-
i.There is no evidence on record which can be tampered with by the accused in any manner.
ii.That the prosecutrix admitted in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that she used to speak to the applicant on mobile phone for approximately Period of acquaintance between the applicant and the prosecutrix prior to the present incident and that she was in love with the applicant.
iii.That the manner in which the entire version of the prosecutrix appears in her statement leaves no doubt that the prosecutrix has made exaggerations in her statement.
iv.That even otherwise, the detention of the applicant/accused is no longer necessary, because the statement of the prosecutrix, which is on its face false, has already been recorded. There is nothing to show that, if released on bail, the applicant/accused will be in a position to hamper the trial in any manner or influence any witness.
v.That it cannot be lost sight of that rape causes the greatest distress and humiliation to the victim, but at the same time a false allegation of rape can cause equal distress, humiliation and damage to the accused as well, and the accused must be protected against the possibility of false implication, particularly where a large number of accused are involved. There is no presumption, nor any basis for assuming, that the statement of the prosecutrix is always correct or without any embellishment or exaggeration.
vi.That the accused is always available to submit himself to the custody of the Court at any point of time.
vii.That it is a basic principle of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is considered innocent until held guilty.
viii.That it may not be out of context to point out that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Co-accused's name Chandra Vs. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40, has once again upheld the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence of "bail and not jail" and has observed that it has stated time and again that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It was further observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
ix.In the case of [State of Rajasthan v. Balchand,](http://indiankanoon.org/doc/8258/) (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Hon'ble Supreme Court opined:
"That the basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the Court. We do not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative.
It is true that the gravity of the offence involved is likely to induce the petitioner to avoid the course of justice and must weigh with us when considering the question of jail. So also the heinousness of the crime. Even so, the record of the petitioner in this case is that, while he has been on bail throughout in the trial court and he was released after the judgment of the High Court, there is nothing to suggest that he has abused the trust placed in him by the court; his social circumstances also are not so unfavorable in the sense of his being a desperate character or unsocial element who is likely to betray the confidence that the court may place in him to turn up to take justice at the hands of the court. He is stated to be a young man of 27 years with a family to maintain. The circumstances and the social milieu do not militate against the petitioner being granted bail at this stage. At the same time any possibility of the absconsion or evasion or other abuse can be taken care of by a direction that the petitioner will report himself before the police station at Baren once every fortnight."
x.That in the case of Siddharam Satlingoppa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, the Hon'ble Court observed:
"Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case."
xi.That the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken the view that where there is a delay in the trial, bail should be granted to the accused [See Babba v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 11 SCC 569; [Vivek Kumar v. State of U.P.,](http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1957784/) (2000) 9 SCC 443; [Mahesh Kumar Bhawsinghka v. State of Delhi,](http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1766034/) (2000) 9 SCC 383].
xii.That, in fact, the prosecutrix was in love with co-accused Co-accused's name, who is the real brother of the applicant/accused. The prosecutrix has been exchanging messages with and chatting on WhatsApp with the applicant.
xiii.That the trial of the case is likely to take a long time to conclude, and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the applicant/accused in custody during its pendency.
xiv.That the grant or refusal of bail lies within the discretion of the Court. The grant or denial of bail is, to a large extent, regulated by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. At the same time, the right to bail ought not to be denied merely on account of the sentiments of the community against the accused. The primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him in custody pending trial, and, at the same time, to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the Court, whether before or after conviction, so as to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the Court and remain in attendance whenever his presence is required.
xv.That the accused/applicant is a young person of clean antecedents, has no influence over the prosecution witnesses, and there is no likelihood of his tampering with the said witnesses or evidence.
xvi.That, as per the jurisprudence of bail, the aim is to achieve a balance between personal liberty and social security; however, prolonged detention of the accused during the trial ought to be avoided. A first-time offender with no criminal antecedents is to be considered separately. The object of detention is primarily to secure the presence of the accused at the time of trial and to ensure that he appears before the Court to receive sentence, if awarded. However, where the accused has deep roots in society, his pre-trial detention ought to be avoided.
10.That the applicant/accused is ready and willing to furnish surety to the entire satisfaction of this Hon'ble Court.
11.That it may respectfully be submitted that the applicant/accused has a completely clean record. The applicant/accused has never been convicted in any case in the past. It cannot, under any circumstances, be construed that the applicant/accused has a bad record suggesting that he is likely to commit similar or serious offences while on bail.
12.That Section 439 Cr.P.C. itself provides that the Court may, while granting bail, impose the condition that such person shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected.
13.That the accused has deep roots in society, and there is absolutely no chance of the accused absconding from the course of justice or tampering with the evidence.
14.That the accused has already been in judicial custody for more than Period of custody already undergone.
15.That no useful purpose would be served by declining to enlarge the applicant on bail during the pendency of the trial.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-
a)Grant bail to the applicant and release the applicant on bail in FIR No. FIR number under Sections Sections of IPC under which FIR registered IPC registered at Police Station Name of police station, City, in the interest of justice, and on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.
FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE ACCUSED SHALL ALWAYS PRAY.
CityAPPLICANT
THROUGH
DATED:
Date of filing
ADVOCATES
Counsel's name
Counsel's enrolment and chamber details