Hasib vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed for regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No. 491 of 2022 registered at police station Bahadarabad, District Haridwar. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, “IPC”) and Sections 5(l), 5j(ii) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Heard Mr. M.K. Goyal, learned counsel for the applicant (through video conferencing) and Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned counsel for the State, has opposed the Bail Application. He submits that an FIR was lodged by the informant, the victim’s father, on 31.12.2022 that Hasib (applicant) had seduced his sixteen years seven months old daughter and taken her with him on 21.12.2022. The First Information Report was registered under Section 363 IPC. On a secret information, the victim was recovered along with the present applicant on 31.01.2023. Her medical examination was conducted. The victim was six weeks’ two days’ pregnant at the time of her medical examination. During the course of the investigation, it was found that the victim was having bleeding. She was taken to hospital. On seeing the ultrasound report of the victim, doctor informed that there was no part of foetus left in the womb of victim. Charge-sheet has been filed.

Mr. M.K. Goyal, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The prosecutrix was major at the time of the alleged incident. There are material discrepancies regarding the age of the prosecutrix. The date of birth certificate of the prosecutrix, issued by the school authorities, is still to be proved. In the absence of the material on which the date of birth of the prosecutrix was recorded in the school register, the evidentiary value of the school register is not of much significance at this stage. Applicant, aged about 19 years, is in custody since 31.01.2023. He has no criminal history. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the applicant is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The First Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant- Hasib 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 with the following conditions :-

i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.