Nitesh @ Nitish Chauhan vs State Of Uttarakhand

Manoj K. Tiwari, J

Heard Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Versha Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Meena Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the records.

The applicant is in jail being implicated in Case Crime No. 413 of 2018, under Sections 363, 376, 107 & 344 of I.P.C. and Sections 6/16 of POCSO Act, registered in Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun.

Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Advocate for the applicant submits that the victim has not supported the prosecution story in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., where she has stated that she had gone to the house of applicant with her own free will. He further submits that there is a delay of 16 days in lodging the FIR. He further submits that the parties are ready to marry, once the victim attains the age of majority. He further gives an undertaking on behalf of his client that he will furnish an undertaking before learned Magistrate at the time of bail that he will marry victim as soon as she attains the age of majority. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.10.2018.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. However, in case, applicant violates the undertaking to be given before learned Magistrate in the form of an affidavit, the bail application shall stand cancelled, without reference to the Court.

Let the applicant be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid crime on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like 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 disposal of bail application. It shall not be taken into consideration at all in any other proceedings.