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
9 paragraphs · 252 wordsRavindra Maithani, J
Applicant Rajeev Juyal is in judicial custody in FIR/Crime No. 14 of 2022, under Section 323, 376, 506 IPC & Section 5 (k) (l)/6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Kotwali Dehradun District Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
According to the FIR, the applicant molested the victim, a young girl of 13 years. He, in fact, raped her. The FIR was lodged by the mother of the victim.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a false case. The FIR is lodged by the step-mother of the victim. The biological mother of the victim had already divorced her father. The informant wants to grab the property, where the applicant also resides.
On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that the victim has supported the prosecution case at trial.
It has been revealed from the record that the victim is a girl of less understanding. She has stated in her examination in the court about the rape having been committed by the applicant on her. She has also stated about the molestation. The informant has supported it. During medical examination also, the victim reveals these things.
Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court does not see any reason to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected.
The bail application is rejected.