For the best experience, open
on your mobile browser.

Allahabad High Court allows bail application of inspector accused of rape

06:53 PM Mar 14, 2023 IST | India Legal
allahabad high court allows bail application of inspector accused of rape

The Allahabad High Court has allowed the bail application of Inspector Tilakdhari Saroj accused of rape.

A Single Bench of Justice Siddharth passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Tilakdhari Saroj.

There is allegation in the FIR lodged by Smt Dhanush Rani @ Mamta, against the applicant and five co-accused persons, namely, Chandan, Rajbhan, Harishshankar, Mahendra Chaurasia and Smt Gulab Bai Ahirwar, that minor daughter of informant aged about 13 years was enticed away by co-accused, Chandan, Rajbhan, Harishankar and Mahendra Chauraia on 22.04.2022.


It is further alleged that on 26.04.2022 the accused persons left the victim at the police station with the inspector and ran away. The inspector handed over the victim to her aunt (mausi), co-accused, Gulab Bai Ahirwar and she sent the victim back. On 27.04.2022 the victim was called at police station and after her statement was recorded her mausi aforesaid handed over the victim to the Station House Officer, Tilakdhari Saroj, applicant who raped the victim inside the police station. On 30.04.2022, the victim was handed over to the childline.

Senior Counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of false implication of the applicant by the mother of the victim. First of all he has pointed out to the FIR dated 15.11.2021 lodged by the victim herself under Sections – 323, 504, 506 IPC against her father and mother, namely, Manoj Ahirwar and Smt Mamta Ahirwar, the informant of the case.


In the aforesaid FIR, it has been alleged by the victim herself that her mother has lodged false reports against many persons herself and also through the victim. She has stated that on 07.11.2021, she got a report lodged against four persons of the village, namely, Rajbhan, Chandan and two sons of Mahendra Chaurasia. The villagers told her that the false implication of an innocent person is very bad and when she informed her mother in this regard she abused her and threw her out of her house. Her father also beated her and threatened her with life.


Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the mother of the victim is habitual of false implication of innocent persons and she extracts money after their false implication from accused persons.


Senior Counsel for the applicant also submitted that the informant has implicated her own sister as an accused in the case who gave shelter to the victim after she was turned out of her house. She is co accused, Gulab Bai Ahirwar. It has been submitted that on account of false implication and extortion of money by the informant from innocent accused persons many persons have committed suicide.

It has further been submitted that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, is at the behest of her mother and is absolutely false. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 04.05.2022.


Senior Counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that the bail of co-accused, Mahendra Chaurasia, has already been rejected by the Court.

A.G.A has also opposed the bail application of the applicant and has submitted that there is serious allegation against the applicant made by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C Being a police officer he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail in view of such allegations.

‘After hearing the rival contentions and considering the antecedents of the victim and her mother, the informant, the prosecution allegations do not inspire confidence. The electronic data and call details collected by the investigating officer show that the deceased was not in the police station on 27.04.2022. The alleged offence therefore was not committed on the aforesaid date. The details of the cases of false implication lodged by the informant and the cases against her show that her conduct cannot be presumed to be fair. There is unexplained delay in lodging of FIR of about 12 days. There is not a single independent witness who may have proved the alleged offences against the applicant. The applicant being a police officer cannot hand over the victim to the child line without any order from the Court. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C does not inspire confidence keeping in view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case.

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicants being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail’, the Court observed while allowing the bail application.

The Court ordered that,

Let the applicant, Tilakdhari Saroj, involved in Case under Sections- 363, 366, 368, 376(da), 201, 120-B, 34, 376(c), 376-DA, 376(3), 506 IPC and Section 5/6, 16/17, 19/21 of POCSO Act and Section 109 IPC, Police Station- Pali, District- Lalitpur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties are verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code 

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Tags :