RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Sunil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) :
Delay in filing counter affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application IA No.2 of 2024 stands disposed of, accordingly.
2. Applicant Sunil Kumar seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.123 of 2024, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. According to the FIR, the applicant has been sexually exploiting the informant for the last 10 years from the date of filing of the FIR. He also got once the foetus of the informant aborted. The FIR records that after the applicant was appointed in the Government Job,, he started threatening the informant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the victim is major; it is a case of relationship. Therefore, it is a case fit for bail.
6. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that the informant is 6 months’ pregnant; the applicant is declining to marry; under the misconception of facts, the applicant established physical relations with the victim.
7. Learned State Counsel adopts the arguments, as advanced by learned counsel for the inf
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.