Arpit Sagar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No.206 of 2023 and Sessions Trial No.856 of 2023, under Section 363, 366, 376, 406, 411, 120-B IPC and Section 5, 6, 16 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station- Transit Camp, Rudrapur, District- Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This is the second bail application. The first bail application, being BA1 No.371 of 2024, was dismissed as withdrawn on 23.04.2024.

According to the FIR, the victim had left her house on 18.07.2023, at 8:00, in the morning, but she did not return. She had taken documents with her also.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant and the victim both were in relationship; the victim joined the company of the applicant on her own and they are ready to marry. Now, they have filed an application for quashing of the FIR also. She would submit that the victim has so stated during investigation or trial. Reference has been made to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as well as the statement recorded during trial. The victim has stated that she was in relationship with the applicant and they both visited various places together.

Learned State Counsel would submit that although according to the victim, she was in relationship with the applicant, but the victim was minor.

In the cases of Mahesh Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 2634, Faizan Wahid Baig v. The State of Maharashtra, MANU/MHOR/62774/2022, Vijaylakshmi and another v. State and another, 2021 SCC OnLine Mad 317, Shri John Franklin Shylla v. State of Meghalaya & Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine Megh 303 and Ashik Ramjali Ansari v. State of Maharashtra and another, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1390, the Courts have either granted bail or quashed the proceedings or acquitted the accused in the cases like instant one.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.