High CourtsSingle Bench

Pradeep Kumar Alias Raju Alias Ajay vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 13 July 2023 · Citation: (2023) 07 UK CK 0077

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 365, 366A, 368, 370(4), 506 · Protection Of The 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. 1601 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

10 paragraphs · 358 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in respect of the First Information Report No.301 of 2022, registered at police station Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2.

First Information Report was registered against unknown person under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”), on the missing report of the informant. As per FIR, minor daughter of the informant was searched, but, she could not be found. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

3.

Heard Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. V.K. Gemini, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

4.

Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 363, 366A, 368, 506, 370(4) IPC, 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.

5.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter; he has no criminal history; he is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar; alleged victim (PW1) and the informant, mother of the victim (PW2) have not supported the case of the prosecution. Co-accused Manoj Kumar has been granted bail by this Court.

6.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he submitted that the victim and her mother did not support the case of the prosecution.

7.

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.

8.

The Bail Application is allowed.

9.

Let the applicant – Pradeep Kumar Alias Raju Alias Ajay 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.