Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

BA1/609/2019 on 9 December, 2019

Author: N.S. Dhanik

Bench: N.S. Dhanik

Misc. Application with R.A. No. 3939 of 2019
In
BAI No. 609 of 2019
Hon'ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

Mr. M.C. Bhatt, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. J.S. Virk, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. Misc. application stands disposed of.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Applicant- Deepak Kumar, who is in jail in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 01 of 2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, registered at Dharchula, District Pithoragarh.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the whole prosecution story is based on the concocted and fabricated facts and since 09.01.2019 the applicant is in jail. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that since one year, the applicant and complainant were in love with each other and the complainant already knew this fact that the present applicant i.e. Deepak Kumar is belonged to Scheduled Caste but, when this fact came into the knowledge of her parents, she was being pressurized by her parents to falsely implicate the present applicant in the instant crime.

Learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the bail application contending that the applicant was seriously involved in the crime and has committed a serious offence. He also submits that in her statement recorded before the trial Court, under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., the victim supported the prosecution version. Furthermore, there are specific and serious allegations against the present applicant, which proves the involvement of the present applicant in the instant crime. He would further submit that the allegations leveled against the applicant shows a heinous nature of offence being committed by him and, therefore, his bail application is liable to be rejected.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no good ground is made to grant bail at this stage. The first bail application is rejected.




                            (N.S. Dhanik, J.)
Shiksha                         09.12.2019