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
8 paragraphs · 221 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant Junaid is in judicial custody in FIR No.356 of 2022, under Sections 323, 376(2)(n), 376(3), 457, 504 and 506 IPC, Sections 5(l)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (as amended in 2015), Police Station- Kotwali Laksar, District- Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant would submit that the informant, the victim, and other family members have not supported the prosecution case at trial; they have been declared hostile; there is no forensic, electronic or biological evidence against the applicant. The statements of the mother of the victim, the uncle of the victim, the victim and the father of the victim have been enclosed.
Learned State Counsel admits these facts.
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 of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.