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
5 paragraphs · 191 wordsHon''ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.
Applicant Vijendra Singh, who is in jail in connection with Crime No. 02 of 2011, relating to offences punishable u/s 292, 384 I.P.C., and one punishable u/s 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, registered at Revenue Police Station- Dhanolti, District Tehri Garhwal, has sought his release on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that during investigation, it is revealed that the daughter-in-law of the complainant had illicit relations with the applicant for two years, and she never disclosed her relationship nor ever complained that any film was made or obscene photographs were taken. The complaint has been lodged by the father-in-law of the woman. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the story of extortion is totally false.
In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this court is of the view that applicant deserves bail.
The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Vijendra Singh, be released on bail, on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal.