Sanju Alias Sanjay vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

The Applicant- Sanju alias Sanjay is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), Section 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 3(a) read with Section 4(2) and Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Case Crime No.653 of 2024, registered at Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar.

Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The alleged victim, aged about 13 years, (PW1) and her father, the informant (PW2) have not supported the case of the prosecution. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding, and, he is in custody since 07.08.2024.

Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application. However, he conceded that the victim and the informant have not supported the case of the prosecution.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the 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, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits 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- Sanju alias Sanjay 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.