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
15 paragraphs · 268 wordsSUDHANSHU DHULIA, J. (ORAL)
Heard Mr. Avidit Noliyal, Advocate for the accused applicant, and Ms. Sangeeta Bharadwaj, Brief Holder for the State.
The applicant is in jail having been implicated in Case Crime No. 539 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 366, 376, 504 and 506 IPC registered in
the Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun.
It is contended that the prosecutrix is 21 years of age and thus a major. Initially a missing report was filed on 23.11.2017. Thereafter the girl was
allegedly recovered on 30.11.2017 from the custody of the present accused applicant. It is alleged that the prosecutrix remained in the illegal custody
of the applicant for 7-8 days. All the same, as per the medical report, there is no injury on the body of the prosecutrix. Moreover, there are some
contradictions in the statements made by the prosecutrix under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC. There is also a contradiction regarding the place of
recovery of the prosecutrix. Accused applicant is in jail since 30.11.2017.
Considering the overall materials presently available before this Court, prima facie the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The bail
application is allowed accordingly.
Let the applicant be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid crime on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned.
It is made clear that any observation made by this Court is only for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and the same shall not be taken
into consideration at all in any other proceedings.