Maan Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Delay in filing counter affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application, IA No.2 of 2024, stands disposed of, accordingly.

Applicant is in judicial custody in Complaint case No.1143 of 2023,, Smt. Payal Vs.. Maan Singh, under Sections 376, 354, 506 and 452 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Ranipur, District- Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The case is based on a complaint. According to the complainant, her husband was implicated in a false case of theft. She used to visit court. The applicant came close to her and assured that he would get her husband released from jail. The applicant started visiting the complainant. On 12.08.2022, the applicant entered into the house of the complainant, raped her and threatened her to life and, thereafter, he continued doing so on multiple occasions. Even when the husband of the complainant was released, according to the complainant, on 22.03.2023, still the applicant tried to commit rape on the complainant, but the complainant raised alarm. There are other averments also.

The complainant was issued notices. As per the Registry report, notice has been served on her personally, but she is not appearing.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a false implication; there is no medical report; there is no criminal history.

Learned State Counsel would submit that the applicant was summoned in the complaint case, but he did not appear.

At it, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has already surrendered into custody.

It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial, or in any other proceeding.

Admittedly, the applicant and the complainant both are major. The first incident allegedly took place on 12.08.2022. Initially, according to the complainant herself, the applicant made friendly entry into the life of the complainant, but at no point of time ever any alarm was raised by the complainant for a long, which she did on 22.03.2023.

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.