CRLA/334/2021
2022 Latest Caselaw 1758 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

                     13TH JUNE, 2022

             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 334 of 2021


Between:

Sherdeen                                          ...Appellant

and

State of Uttarakhand.                            ...Respondent


Counsel for the Appellant   :     Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned
                                  counsel holding brief of Mr.
                                  Mohd.     Safdar,    learned
                                  counsel.
Counsel for the State           : Mr. T.C. Agarwal, learned
                                  Deputy Advocate General
                                  assisted by Mr. Pramod
                                  Tiwari, learned Brief Holder
                                  for the State.


Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the

appellant-Sherdeen against the judgment dated

04.10.2021, passed by F.T.S.C./Additional Sessions Judge,

Roorkee, District Haridwar in Special Sessions Trial No.41

of 2018, "State vs. Sherdeen", whereby the appellant has

been convicted for the offence under Section 354A IPC

and Section 9/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Act,

2012") and in terms of Section 42 of the Act, 2012,

the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for a period of five years along with a fine of

Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 9/10 of the Act,

2012.

2. Heard Mr. Parikshit Saini, the learned counsel

holding brief of Mr. Mohd. Safdar, the learned counsel for

the appellant and Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy

Advocate General assisted by Mr. Pramod Tiwari, the

learned Brief Holder for the State, on the bail application.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted

that there are substantial doubts about the conviction; the

appellant is a permanent resident of District Haridwar; he

has no criminal history; he was on bail during the trial and

the conditions of the bail were neither misused nor

violated by him and he is in custody since 04.10.2021.

4. The learned counsel for the State opposed the

bail application. However, he fairly conceded that the

appellant has no criminal history; he was on bail during

the trial and the conditions of the bail were not misused

by him.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant-

Sherdeen, provided he submits a personal bond and two

reliable sureties of the same amount to the satisfaction of

the court concerned.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 13.06.2022 JKJ/Pant