In a bail application, the High Court of Uttarakhand allowed the applicant's bail, considering the nature of offences, lack of prior record, and readiness to comply with conditions while noting the applicant was a juvenile at the time of offence.
Released on personal bond and two sureties subject to condition not to remain in father's clinic in his absence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated : Nainital the 16th May, 2014
Second Bail Application No.37 of 2014 Order on the bail application of accused
CRIMINAL SIDE
Shahrukh … Applicant
versus
State of Uttarakhand … Respondent
Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. P. S. Soan, Deputy Advocate General present for the respondent State.
U.C. Dhyani, J. (Oral)
The applicant seeks bail in connection with F.I.R. no.31/2014, under Section 354A and 506 IPC and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Gadarpur (Gularbhoj), District Udham Singh Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered the grounds taken in the bail application and perused the documents on record.
The FIR was lodged against the applicant under Section 354A and 506 IPC and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. This Court was taken through the contents of the FIR by learned counsel for the applicant, who contended that the offence under Section 354A IPC is a bailable offence. Learned counsel for the applicant also stated that the applicant is ready to abide by the condition whichever the Court imposes on him. He is in judicial detention since 15.03.2014 and has no previous criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant also
-2-
submitted that the applicant was a juvenile at the time of the commission of offence, but this Court is not entering into this aspect of the matter.
Considering the above facts and circumstances, a case of bail is made out in favour of the present applicant. The bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M., Udham Singh Nagar.
It is also provided that applicant’s father, who is stated to be running a medical clinic in which the alleged incident took place, shall not permit the applicant to remain inside the clinic in his (father’s) absence.
Dated 16th May, 2014
Rawat
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in charges under Section 354A IPC, Section 506 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Shahrukh
State of Uttarakhand
U.C. Dhyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
