Mohit Kashyap vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 343 of 2023, under Section 323, 354(A), 354 (D), 376 IPC and Section 3(a)/4 and 11(iv)/12 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Pathri, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, the applicant has been harassing the victim, a young girl, who was studying in Class XII. He would threatened the victim and once he did Galat Kaam with her Jabardasti.

Learned Senior counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant and the victim both were in relationship for two years prior to the lodging of the FIR. They have been talking on social media. Chats have been referred to which have been filed. It is also argued that the victim and the applicant, both are major. Due to some altercations between the applicant and the victim, the FIR has been lodged. It is also argued that PW4 to PW7, all have not supported the prosecution case.

Learned State counsel would submit that the victim has supported the prosecution case at trial. Another witness has supported the prosecution case. He would submit that the victim is minor girl of 17 years of age.

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 proceedings.

The victim has been examined at trial. In her examination, she has supported the prosecution case. During her medical examination, she has stated that sexual assault was made on her one and a half years prior to her medical examination. The victim has also proved her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, wherein she has stated that she was in friendship with the applicant for two years. Certain whatsapp photographs of the applicant and the victim have been referred to. Those have not been disputed by the prosecution.

In the cases of Mahesh Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 2634, Faizan Wahid Baig v. The State of Maharashtra, MANU/MHOR/62774/2022, Vijaylakshmi and another v. State and another, 2021 SCC OnLine Mad 317, Shri John Franklin Shylla v. State of Meghalaya & Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine Megh 303 and Ashik Ramjali Ansari v. State of Maharashtra and another, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1390, the Courts have either granted bail or quashed the proceedings or acquitted the accused in the cases like instant one.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that subject to certain conditions, the applicant may 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, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant or any of his relatives shall not make any contact with the victim, in any manner, whatsoever, either physically, electronically or by any other means.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and the applicant should not tamper with evidence.