Nanhey S/o Sri Mahendra Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.42 of 2021, registered with Police Station I.T.I., District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) of I.P.C. and Section 5(l)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012..

The father of the victim lodged an F.I.R. on 09.02.2021, and according to the F.I.R., his daughter, aged about 14 years, was missing since 08.02.2021. During the investigation, the victim was recovered from the custody of the present applicant.

The learned counsel for the State submitted that according to the prosecution case, the present applicant committed rape on the minor victim.

Heard Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated; the victim and her father, informant, did not support the prosecution case in the trial; he is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar; he has no criminal history and he is in judicial custody since 01.03.2021.

The learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail application orally, however, he fairly conceded that the victim and her father have not supported the prosecution case in the trial and the applicant has no criminal history.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of an individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

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.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant Nanhey 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.

Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the applicant within 24 hours on payment of usual charges.