CRLA/464/2019
2023 Latest Caselaw 25 UK

                   Office Notes,
                reports, orders or
                 proceedings or
Sl. No   Date                                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
                  directions and
                Registrar's order
                 with Signatures
                                     CRMA No.2756 of 2019 (Bail Application)
                                     In
                                     CRLA No.464 of 2019
                                     Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Manish Bisht, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, Brief Holder, for the State of Uttarakhand.

The present applicant/appellant is a convict, on the conclusion of the proceedings of Sessions Trial No.230 of 2017, whereby, he has been convicted for the offences under sections 376(2), 363 and 366A of IPC.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant, that if a conjoint interpretation is given to the statement to the victim recorded under section 164 CrPC, and with the statement of the PW 6, the Doctor, who had medically examined the victim, there happens to be a massive contradiction in the findings recorded in paragraph no.24, of the judgment, which has been relied by the learned Government Advocate, while opposing the bail application.

On the simplicitor reading of the statement made under section 164 of CrPC and that of the report of the Doctor, paper no.54, and particularly, having reference to paragraph nos.8, 9 and 11, of the statement recorded, therein, by the Doctor, no opinion of rape has been given as such by the Doctor, who had medically examined the victim.

It has been further argued by the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, that after the judgment of the conviction dated 31.07.2019, the applicant is languishing in jail ever since then, and he has already served about more than three and a half years of sentence out of the total sentence of 10 years of conviction, as imposed upon him.

It has been further argued, that during the course of the trial, the appellant was on bail and there is no finding recorded as such, that when he was on bail during the course of trial, he has ever misused the same.

In that eventuality, this Court is inclined to release the appellant on bail, subject to the furnishing of his personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Court concerned. However, his release on bail would be subject to the depositing of the penalty amount as imposed by the learned Sessions Court by the judgment of conviction dated 31.07.2019.

The Registry is directed to prepare the paperbook and supply the same to the counsels for the parties on the payment of usual charges, for enabling the final hearing of the matter.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 03.01.2023

NR/