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
13 paragraphs · 239 wordsSudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. J.S. Virk, AGA, for the State of Uttarakhand.
The applicant is in jail having been implicated in Case Crime No.335 of 2018, which has been registered under Sections 16/17 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, at Police Station â€" Pathri, District â€" Haridwar.
As per the prosecution, the age of the prosecutrix is 15-16 years. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the main allegation of rape is against
one Jasveer and the applicant has not been named in the first information report, nor the name of the applicant has come in the statement of the
prosecutrix under Section 164 of CrPC. Moreover, the medical evidence does not suggest any rape.
Considering the overall evidence, which is presently available before this Court and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 03.07.2018, prima facie,
the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed accordingly.
Let the applicant be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid crime on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the equal amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned.
It is made clear that any observation made by this Court is only for the purpose of deciding the present bail application. It shall not be taken into
consideration at all in any other proceedings.