SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
Vipin Singh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


ORDER

1. An application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.PC for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 118/2021 under Sections 363/366/376/506 IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 registered at Police Station Neb Sarai.

2. A copy of the petition be supplied to the learned counsel for the prosecutrix, as prayed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has claimed that the age of the prosecutrix as per the copy of the Aadhar Card in his possession is 07.03.2001 and as such, she was a major on the alleged date of incident. Reliance is also placed upon the PAN Card as well copy of the voter I.D. Card issued to the prosecutrix.

4. On the other hand, it is pointed out by the learned APP for the State that as per investigation, the copy of the Aadhar Card furnished by the prosecutrix reflects date of birth as `2004'. Further, as per the date of birth certificate issued by the GNCT of Delhi, the date of birth is 07.03.2004.

5. In the aforesaid background, it was directed by this Court vide order dated 27.07.2022 that it is it is imperative that the correct particulars of the date of birth of proseeutrix/victim entered in Aadhar Card be confirm

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top