Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/117/2022 on 17 August, 2023
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings or
SL.
Date directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
17.08.2023 CRLA No. 117 of 2022
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. Zafar Siddique, Advocate, for
the appellant.
Mr. Deepak Bisht, Brief Holder,
for the State.
The appellant is serving his
sentence as a consequence of the
judgment of conviction dated 13.04.2022,
as it was rendered by Court of Additional
Sessions Judge/FTC, Haldwani, in
Miscellaneous Case No. 54 of 2017, which
was the trial conducted for the offence
under Sections 376, 363, 366 of IPC and
Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, whereby
the learned Judge has convicted the
present appellant for his alleged
involvement in commission of the
aforesaid offences.
As a consequence of the aforesaid
judgment of conviction, the appellant has
been respectively directed to undergo
sentence of 7 years of sentence for the
offence under Section 376 of IPC; 5 years
of sentence for the offence under Section
363 of IPC; 5 years for the offence under
Section 366 of IPC and 7 years of sentence
for the offence under Section 3/4 of
POCSO Act.
It has been argued by the learned
counsel for the appellant, that till date the
appellant has served about 1 year and 10
months of the sentence out of the total
period of 7 years, as imposed upon him,
coupled with the fact that during the
course of trial, the appellant was on bail
and he has never misused the same.
But also on further scrutinisation
of the statement of the victim as recorded
under Section 164 of CrPC, she admits the
fact that she was in an intimate
relationship with the present appellant
and she has willingly eloped from her
residence in the morning at 2.30 on
29.06.2017 and had gone to Tanakpur
thereafter to Champawat; she stayed in a
hotel and she admits the fact that she has
voluntarily established physical
relationship with the present appellant
because she wanted to marry him.
A question arise that since the
victim was minor her eloping from the
residence on 29.06.2017 and
establishment of the physical relationship
that in itself may not have any
consequential bearing on the case in
question for considering the bail because
the consent of a minor is irrelevant; but
now as gradually law has developed a
minor who is marginally minor than to the
prescribed age under law and if she
voluntarily moves around with the male,
the said aspect has to be also considered
and dealt with differently, because it
could be said that this was a relationship
which was established infancies because
of the infatuation which they have
developed for one another.
Owing to the aforesaid reasons,
the appellant is directed to be released on
bail subject to executing of his personal
bond and furnishing two sureties, each of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Court concerned.
Accordingly, the Bail Application
would stand disposed of.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
17.08.2023
Mahinder/
