Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/136/2021 on 3 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2021
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.136 OF 2021
3rd AUGUST, 2021
Between:
Vishu ....Appellant
and
State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent
Counsel for the appellant : Mr. R.S. Sammal,
learned Counsel.
Counsel for the respondent : Mr. J.S. Virk, learned
Deputy Advocate General
for the State.
The Court made the following :
ORDER : (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Alok Kumar Verma)
The instant bail application is filed for seeking bail
in this criminal appeal.
2
2. This criminal appeal has been filed by the
appellant against the judgment dated
24.03.2021/26.03.2021, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge/F.T.S.C., Haridwar in Special Sessions Trial
No. 66 of 2019, "State Vs. Vishu", whereby, the appellant
has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of three years along with a fine of
Rs. 10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 363 of
I.P.C.; he has been convicted for the offence under Section
376 (3) of I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short "the Act, 2012")
and in the terms of Section 42 of the Act, 2012, he has been
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
twenty years along with a fine of Rs. 50,000/- under Section
376 (3) of I.P.C. . Both the sentences are directed to run
concurrently.
3. Heard Mr. R.S. Sammal, the learned counsel for
the appellant and Mr. J.S. Virk, the learned Deputy Advocate
General for the State through video conferencing.
4. Mr. R.S. Sammal, the learned counsel for the
appellant, submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove
its case. The victim has not supported the prosecution case.
During trial, he was on bail and the conditions of the bail
were neither violated nor misused by him. However, the
3
learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
appellant undertakes that during bail, the appellant will
neither have any contact with the victim nor with her family
members.
5. Mr. J.S. Virk, the learned Deputy Advocate
General appearing for the State, opposed the bail
application. However, he fairly conceded that during trial,
the appellant-applicant was on bail and the conditions of the
bail were not violated or misused by him and the victim has
not supported the prosecution case.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant,
namely, Vishu. The appellant be released on bail provided,
he submits a personal bond of Rs.30,000/-, and two reliable
sureties of the same amount, to the satisfaction of the
learned trial court. He is directed to observe the following
conditions:-
i. The appellant shall maintain peace and tranquility
during the pendency of the appeal.
ii. The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case.
iii. The appellant shall report to the jurisdiction of
police on every Monday of each week of each
month.
iv. The appellant neither contact the victim nor her
family.
4
7. The informant be informed that the appellant-
Vishu has been granted bail and a copy of this bail order be
provided to him through Registry of this High Court
forthwith.
____________________________
RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, C.J.
_______________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dt: 3rd August, 2021
Pant
