Nanhe Mayuar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Vivek Bharti Sharma, J

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application being IA No.1/2023 stands allowed. Counter affidavit is taken on record.

Applicant Nanhe Mayuar, who is in judicial custody in FIR No.77 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC and Sections 5, 6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kathgodam, District Nainital, has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on file.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that she left her home on her own when her brother was beating her and thereafter she went to Bareilly with the applicant/accused and established physical relation with her consent as she knows the applicant/accused since last five to six months and therefrom she went to Panipat from where she was recovered. Counsel for the applicant would further submit that in the FIR itself it has come that the prosecutrix was victim of same kind of sexual assault previously also and he has placed the copy of the judgment passed by the Special Judge, POCSO/FTC, Nainital of that case, which reads that in previous case one Mohit Arya was acquitted in the case of sexual assault upon the prosecutrix. He would further submit that the charge sheet was filed on 03.08.2022 and charges were framed in the month of November, 2022, but no evidence is recorded till date; the applicant/accused is languishing in jail since long and there is no possibility in near future about the conclusion of the trial.

Per contra, Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, AGA for the State would vehemently oppose the bail application. However, the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is admitted and the fact that no evidence is recorded inspite of charge sheet being filed in the month of November, 2022.

In the circumspection of facts, without expressing any opinion about merits of the case before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that this is a case for bail.

The bail application is, accordingly, allowed. Let the applicant be released on furnishing bail bond with two sureties in the amount of ₹ 35,000/- and personal bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.