CRLA/320/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 1400 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.           or proceedings
      Date                                      COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No           or directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                 I.A. No.1 of 2022 (Bail Application)
                                 In
                                 CRLA No. 320 of 2022
                                 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. J.S. Virk, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

2. This Appeal has been preferred against the judgment & order dated 21.07.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.S.C., Haridwar in Special Sessions Trial No. 137 of 2018, whereby appellants have been convicted under Section 363 I.P.C. read with Sections 16/17 POCSO Act and sentenced each one of them to undergo simple imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of ` 5,000/- each.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the bail application moved on behalf of the appellants.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that veracity of the prosecution version is doubtful. Learned Counsel contends that FIR is not prompt inasmuch as the alleged incident took place on 28.12.1997 and the FIR could be lodged almost after one month of the said incident. Learned Counsel further contends that there are material contradictions about the age of the victim, who has been falsely shown as minor only to aggravate the offence. Learned Counsel contends that as per the birth certificate (Ex. Kha-1), issued under Registration of Deaths and Births Act, the date of birth of victim is 14.7.1997 and inconsistencies in the age related evidence adduced by the prosecution completely discredits the entire prosecution version and the Court below has overlooked this aspect while convicting the appellants. Learned Counsel contends that three other co- accused persons, including father of the main accused, were implicated and after the investigation, they were exonerated. Learned Counsel further contends that the medical evidence also does not support the prosecution case. Learned Counsel contends that FIR is the result of opposition of victim's parents to her relationship with the convict Anil. Learned Counsel also contends that appellants were on bail during trial and they never misused the liberty and they have no previous criminal history apart from the instant case and they are in jail since 21.7.2022.

5. Learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and contended that the offence is heinous and appellants have been convicted after trial, based on reliable and believable evidence.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and without any comment on the final merits of the appeal, we are of the opinion that appellants deserve bail at this stage. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

7. Let the appellants be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each in the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

(PankajPurohit, J.) (Manoj KumarTiwari, J.) 19.05.2023 Arpan