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
12 paragraphs · 213 wordsSudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)
Heard Mr. R.S. Sammal, Advocate, for the applicant and Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.
The applicant is in jail having been implicated in FIR No.86 of 2018, which has been registered under Sections 363 and 366 of IPC and under Sections
16/17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station â€" Rudrapur, District- Udham Singh Nagar. The age of the
prosecutrix as per the prosecution is between 17 to 18 years. The prosecutrix has not supported the story of the prosecution in her statement under
Section 164 of CrPC rather she has categorically stated that she has gone with applicant willingly.
Considering the overall evidence, which is 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 of the equal amount to the
satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.
It is made clear that any observations made by this Court are only for the purposes of grant of bail. It shall not be taken into consideration at all in any
other proceedings.