Naveen Nautiyal vs State Of Uttarakhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 876 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Naveen Nautiyal vs State Of Uttarakhand on 7 May, 2024

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Pankaj Purohit

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

                                AND

             HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PANKAJ PUROHIT

                      Dated- 7th May, 2024

               Criminal Appeal No.834 of 2023


Naveen Nautiyal                                    ........Appellant

                               Versus
State of Uttarakhand                               .....Respondent

Presence:-

Mr. Bhuwnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Dy. A.G. with Mr. Rakesh Kr. Joshi, learned B.H. for the State.

Judgment- (Per Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.]

Despite service of notice, neither there is any representation on behalf of the informant nor any objection to the bail application has been filed, though time for that purpose, as sought for, was granted by this Court vide order dated 19.03.2024 to Mr. Arun Pratap Shah, learned counsel who appeared for informant on said date.

2. This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [to be referred to 'SC/ST Act' for brevity] challenging the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by learned Special Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi in Second Bail Application No.112 of 2023 (Naveen Nautiyal v. State) passed in respect of Special S.T. No.94 of 2022 arising out of Crime/FIR No.01 of 2022 registered with Revenue Outpost-Junga, District Uttarkashi, whereby the second bail application moved by appellant was rejected.

3. Appellant is under incarceration in connection with aforesaid crime. It is contended by learned Counsel appearing for appellant that a named FIR was lodged against him by mother of informant-victim alleging commission of sexual assault against her minor daughter. In the first information report, it is stated that on 04.09.2022, the victim, aged about 16 years, went to the nearby forest for grazing sheep, where the appellant, a resident of Village Kumarkot, came drunk and started misbehaving with informant's daughter. It is further alleged that her daughter was alone and none was there around, and taking advantage of situation, appellant held both hands of victim and misbehaved with her. It is further alleged that the victim was thrown on the ground by appellant, but somehow, she managed to escape from his clutches and ran away from the spot. In the said incident, victim sustained injuries on her right hand besides below her waist. In the first information report, it is also alleged that appellant called her with caste indicative words and threatened to ruin her family.

4. It is contended by learned Counsel for appellant that on the basis of above, initially, the Chick report for offences u/s 354, 323, 506 IPC, Sections 3(1)(x) of the SC/ ST Act and Sections 4/5 of the POCSO Act was registered, but subsequently, the charge-sheet was filed including Section 376(3) IPC. It is further submitted that appellant has been falsely implicated and the version of first information report does not support the allegation of rape or sexual assault upon the victim at the hands of appellant. It is further argued that connected appeal being CRLA No.190 of 2023 (Pavitra Devi v. State) is also pending before this Court, wherein,

proceedings of Special S.T. No.94 of 2022 'State v. Naveen Nautiyal' has been stayed. On the one hand, the trial is stayed while on the other, appellant is under incarceration in a false case.

5. Per contra, learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for State submits that charge-sheet was submitted against appellant u/s 376(3) IPC on the basis of evidence. So far as CRLA No.190 of 2023 is concerned, it is submitted that the said appeal is filed against the order dated 10.03.2023 regarding denial of framing of charge u/s 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. It is informed by learned Deputy Advocate General that now the said charge has been framed against the appellant and thus, according to him, the said appeal has rendered infructuous.

6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and on a perusal of record, it is reflected that in connected CRLA No.190 of 2023, some more issues are involved which can be adjudicated only after hearing the parties.

7. At this stage, having considered the version of the prosecution in which the allegations against the appellant were only qua misbehaving with the victim; also the fact that the first information report was lodged primarily u/s 354 IPC; and more particularly for the reason that the proceedings of S.T. No.94 of 2022 (State v. Naveen Nautiyal) have been stayed by the Co-ordinate Bench in CRLA No.190 of 2023 by order dated 11.04.2023, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant at this stage.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Appellant- Naveen Nautiyal is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with the afore-mentioned crime, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

9. Since the present appeal is filed by the appellant seeking bail only, hence this appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 07.05.2024 Rdang