High CourtsSingle Bench

Manoj Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 14 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 UK CK 0034

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366A, 368, 370(4), 506 · Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 16, 17 · Prohibition Of Child Marriage Act, 2006 — Section 9, 10, 11
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
First Bail Application No. 415 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 · 310 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Bail Application has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information Report No.301 of 2022, registered at Police Station Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 363, 366A, 506, 370(4), 368 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 16 read with Section 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

2.

The First Information Report was lodged by the mother of the victim. The said FIR was registered against the unknown persons. Charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant – accused.

3.

Heard Mr. Mani Kumar, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. S.T. Bharadwaj, learned Deputy Advocate General with Ms. Shivangi Gangwar, learned Brief Holder for the State.

4.

Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate, for the applicant has submitted that the victim (PW1) and the informant, the mother of the victim (PW2) have not supported the prosecution’s case during the trial; applicant has no criminal history; he is in custody since 25.11.2022.

5.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he fairly conceded that the victim and her mother have not supported the case of the prosecution.

6.

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 – Manoj Kumar 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.