# Veer Singh v. State Of U.P - **Citation:** (2016) 8 ILRA 725 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2016-08-11 - **Bench:** Karuna Nand Bajpayee - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/veer-singh-v-state-of-u-p-44378 - **Pages:** 3 ## Headnote Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 2006 of 2015, under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(12) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Adampur, District J.P. Nagar-Applicant not named in the F.I.R.-Identity alleged to have surfaced after about two and half months of the incident-Victim an aged lady of about 60 years-Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. narrates forcible sexual assault coupled with robbery-Accused identified subsequently by victim and her son on spotting him, leading to arrest-Nonholding of Test Identification Parade explained as accused was seen after occurrence-Gravity and perversity of offence emphasized-Court held that considering the nature and gravity of accusation and supporting material, no case for bail is made out-Bail rejected-Observations confined to disposal of bail application and not to affect merits of trial. Case Law discussed:- ## Text 8 All. Veer Singh Vs State Of U.P. 725 (2016) 8 ILRA 725 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 11.08.2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE, J. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.- 46128 Of 2015 Veer Singh ...Applicant Versus State Of U.P. ...Opposite Party Counsel for the Applicant: Surendra Prasad Mishra, Prayogendra Pal Singh Counsel for the Opposite Party: Govt. Advocate Headnote: Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 2006 of 2015, under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(12) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Adampur, District J.P. Nagar-Applicant not named in the F.I.R.-Identity alleged to have surfaced after about two and half months of the incident-Victim an aged lady of about 60 years-Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. narrates forcible sexual assault coupled with robbery-Accused identified subsequently by victim and her son on spotting him, leading to arrest-Nonholding of Test Identification Parade explained as accused was seen after occurrence-Gravity and perversity of offence emphasized-Court held that considering the nature and gravity of accusation and supporting material, no case for bail is made out-Bail rejected-Observations confined to disposal of bail application and not to affect merits of trial. Case Law discussed:- (Delivered by Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J.) (Delivered by Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J.) 1. This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.2006 of 2015, u/s 376 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (12) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Adampur, District-J.P. Nagar. 2. Learned A.G.A. has filed counter affidavit on behalf of State which is taken on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. 4. Perused the record. 726 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES 5. Submission of counsel for the applicant is that the complicity of the applicant surfaced after about two and half months of the incident. The applicant was not nominated in the F.I.R. and applicant was not known to the victim from before. There is no proper identification parade organized by the police. Therefore, he should be released on bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the victim is an old lady of about 60 years in age, who was going on foot while the applicant picked her up, gave her lift and then subsequently ravished her. Attention was drawn to the statement of the victim given before the Magistrate in which she has narrated the incident, which also indicates that during the time of this unnatural offence the victim lady was begging for mercy all the time, implored the applicant, tried to tell the applicant about her advanced stage and that she was like his mother, but all her importuning and imploring did not yield any result and the applicant not only raped the victim, but also took away the money which was carried by her. Further submission is that the applicant was not known to the victim from before the incident. He was not nominated by name either by the victim or by the first informant, who was her son, which indicates that neither the first informant nor the victim had any axe to grind against the applicant and there is absolutely no reason to falsely implicate the applicant in the crime. It has been further pointed out that during the course of investigation the victim and her son happened to see the applicant at some place and that is how she happened to identify the applicant and then the information was given to the police whereupon the applicant was apprehended. With regard to not organizing the identification parade, it has been submitted by learned A.G.A. that as the accused applicant was spotted by the victim and her son and the information with regard to the whereabouts of applicant was furnished to the police by the victim herself on which the applicant was arrested, therefore, there was no more justification left for arranging the identification parade as the same would not have carried any great evidentiary value. Identification parades carry weight only in the cases where the identifying the witness does not get or is provided with any opportunity to see the accused any time after the occurrence. Submission is that in the present set of circumstances as are involved in this case the purpose or the object to arrange the identification parade had already got lost because of the applicant having been seen by the victim on subsequent occasions after the occurrence. Further submission is that the crime in question reflects extreme perversity of the applicant who allowed his carnal instincts to blind him so completely that he could dishonour an aged old lady of 60 years. Such kind of savagery displayed by the applicant is sufficient to bracket him in the category of incorrigible delinquents beyond redemption. Only a mentally sick person can display such kind of abhorrent immoral deviation. Submission is that the gravity of the offence involved in the case does not call for any liberal view in the matter. 7. Looking to the nature of offence, its gravity and the evidence in support of it and the overall circumstances of this case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the applicant is rejected. 8. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. ----------- 8 All. Mahesh Chand Vs State Of U.P. & Anr. 727 (2016) 8 ILRA 727 REVISIONAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 11.08.2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Criminal Revision No.- 828 Of 2016 Mahesh Chand ...Revisionist Versus State Of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties Counsel for the Revisionist: Anand Kumar Singh Counsel for the Opposite Parties: G.A. Headnote: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Cheque dishonour - Conviction by Magistrate affirmed in appeal - Matter compromised during pendency of criminal revision - Compounding of offence at revisional stage - Accused willing to deposit 15% of cheque amount as per guidelines of Supreme Court - Court permitted compounding subject to deposit of 15% of cheque amount with State Legal Services Authority - No coercive action to be taken against revisionist till next date. Where the revisionist, convicted under Section 138 N.I. Act and whose appeal had been dismissed, filed a joint affidavit with the complainant during pendency of criminal revision stating that the dispute had been amicably settled and the complainant had received the cheque amount along with compensation, the High Court held that the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act is compoundable even at the revisional stage. Following the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H., the Court directed the revisionist to deposit 15% of the cheque amount as costs with the State Legal Services Authority for permitting compounding. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action was directed to be taken against the revisionist in compliance of the conviction order of the lower court. Case Law discussed: Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (Delivered by Hon'ble Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J.) (Delivered by Hon'ble Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J.) 1. Heard counsel for the revisionist, counsel for opposite party no. 2 and AGA for opposite party no. 1, and perused the record. 2. Revisionist was convicted under section 138 of N.I. Act and was sentenced for imprisonment of one year and Rs. 70,000/- as fine by judgement dated 25.2.2011 of ACJM, Court