ALLAHABAD: In the case of Rajkaran Patel v. the State of U.P. The Allahabad High Court rejected the bail of a High Court Advocate Patel, who has been accused of sexually and physically assaulting a Law Student for a long period of time.
The Bench held by Justice Samit Gopal observed:
“The prosecutrix was junior in the office of the applicant. The allegations are against a person practicing law and is a person in uniform involved in a noble profession. The office of a lawyer is not less respected than Courts of law.”
An FIR was lodged by the father of the law student against the HC Advocate Patel and one Sipahi Lal Shukla. He was charged under Section 366 IPC. The Father of the victim alleged that his 20-year-old daughter was being harassed by both the accused persons. He also claimed that his daughter was practicing in the High Court with Patel.
The Accused has been charged under Sections 366, 376, 354-A, 328, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. The prosecutrix had, in her statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC and under Section 164 CrPC, alleged that the applicant/advocate exploited her at the initial stage and then committed sexual assault on her.
The court observed that there had been no reason spelled out as to why the applicant was being falsely implicated. Therefore, the Court rejected the bail application by observing thus:
“…the investigation for other accused persons is pending and the apprehension of learned counsels for the State and of the panel lawyer of High Court Legal Service Committee of the applicant being in a position to influence the investigation and tamper with the evidence cannot be ruled out at this stage…Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected.”
We hope that this article helped you In some way or another! For more such information, follow us on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Telegram, or simply subscribe to our newsletter.
DOWNLOAD OUR FREE LEGAL MAGAZINE – LAW MANTHAN 1ST EDITION
(MARCH – APRIL 2022)
