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

2024 Supreme(UK) 397

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Jabir - Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No.138 of 2024
Decided On : 22-03-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant :Ms. Prabha Nainthani, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, AGA

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that at the bail stage, the presumption of innocence prevails, and the seriousness of allegations must be weighed against the applicant's rights, leading to the conclusion that bail can be granted even in cases involving serious charges.

Headnote:

BAIL - SEXUAL OFFENCES - The court analyzed the circumstances surrounding the bail application of the applicant, who was accused of inappropriate touching and attempted rape under IPC and POCSO Act. The court highlighted the importance of the victim's statement and medical examination, which revealed more serious allegations. Despite the applicant's claims of a false FIR and prior grievances, the court concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail, emphasizing that the stage of bail requires a cautious approach without prejudicing the case's merits.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant, Jabir, is in judicial custody for allegedly inappropriately touching the informant's daughter and attempting to tear her clothes. The FIR was lodged after the incident, but the applicant claims the FIR is false due to prior disputes over property and money between him and the informant's family.

Finding of the Court:

The court noted that the victim's medical examination and her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC indicated more serious allegations than those initially reported in the FIR. However, the court also recognized the need for caution at the bail stage and the presumption of innocence.

Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail despite serious allegations of sexual offences and the claims of a false FIR.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the applicant was entitled to bail, considering the nature of the allegations, the victim's wavering statements, and the presumption of innocence at the bail stage. The court emphasized that observations made during the bail hearing would not affect the trial's outcome.

Result: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and providing two reliable sureties.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) :

Applicant Jabir is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.782 of 2023, dated 17.10.2023, under Sections 376(3) IPC and Sections 3(a)/4 (2) of The Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, 6-7 days prior to lodging of the FIR, the applicant entered into the house of the informant and inappropriately touched her daughter. When the applicant tired to tear away the clothes of the victim, she cried and the applicant ran away.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a false FIR; she would submit that, in fact, the father-in-law of the informant had sold the house to the applicant; the informant was quite unhappy with it; they were demanding money from the applicant, of which, a report was lodged by the father-in-law of the informant on 25.07.2023. Reference has been made to the Annexure No.8 to the bail application.

5. It is also argued that, in fact, on 07.10.2023, the applicant himself had lodged a report against the informant and his family members for illegally demanding money. Reference has been made to Annexure No.6 to the bail application.

6. In addition to it, it is also argued that the statement of the victim does not, as such support the FIR, it is much wavering.

7. On the last occasion, the Court has required the learned State counsel to get instructions with regard to Annexure Nos.6 and 8. It is stated that according to the Investigating Officer, he did not receive such documents.

8. At it, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, in fact, Annexure No.6 was received by the police and it bears the seal of the police.

9. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion at this stage is to be avoided. To the extent of appreciating the controversy the matter may be examined with the caveat that any observation made at this stage shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the case.

10. As per FIR, it is a case of inappropriate touch; the applicant attempted to tear away the clothes of the victim, when she cried the applicant ran away. But, when the victim was medically examined on 31.10.2023, there She levelled more serious allegations in terms of history of the offence, which the victim told to the doctors. In her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the victim has stated about rape. She has stated when the applicant attempted for rape, she cried out of pain and then the applicant ran away.

11. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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 Back to top