High CourtsSingle Bench

Ibrar Ali vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 21 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 UK CK 0085

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 363, 368, 376 · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 2060 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 396 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with Case Crime No.128 of 2021, registered at police station Sahaspur, District Dehradun. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 363, 368, 376, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2.

A minor girl, aged about 13 years, was missing since 27.06.2021. The First Information Report was lodged by the father of the victim. The First Information Report was registered under Section 363 IPC against the unknown person. Accused was arrested. Charge-sheet was filed. Prosecution has examined four witnesses; Victim (PW1), Doctor (PW2), Father of the Victim (PW3) and Mother of the Victim (PW4).

3.

Heard Mr. Mehboob Rahi with Mr. Tejhar Qayyum, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. for the State.

4.

Mr. Mehboob Rahi, Advocate contended that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. Victim did not support the case of the prosecution in her statement dated 28.04.2023. Informant and mother of the victim also have not supported the case of the prosecution. They have turned hostile. Applicant is in judicial custody since 13.07.2021. Applicant has no criminal history. He is a permanent resident of District Dehradun, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding.

5.

Mr. M.K. Chand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application. However, he has fairly conceded that victim and her father and mother have not supported the case of the prosecution.

6.

The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 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.

7.

The Bail Application is allowed.

8.

Let the applicant-Ibrar Ali 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.