Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Sahil - Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 2428 of 2023
Decided On : 19-02-2024
BAIL - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - The court granted bail to the applicant, Sahil, charged under multiple IPC sections including 376 and 452, after considering the relationship between the applicant and the informant, the circumstances surrounding the FIR, and the victim's support for the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that the observations made would not affect the trial's outcome.
Fact of the Case:
Sahil is in judicial custody under FIR No. 305 of 2023 for charges including attempted rape and assault. The informant alleged that Sahil pressured her for marriage and attempted to establish a physical relationship, leading to abuse and threats when she resisted.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that both parties were adults in a relationship, and the informant had previously been married but sought to be with Sahil. The victim supported the prosecution's case during the investigation, indicating a complex relationship.
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the nature of the charges and the relationship dynamics between the applicant and the informant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the facts presented warranted bail, as the relationship and circumstances suggested that the applicant did not pose a flight risk or threat to the informant.
Result: The bail application was allowed, and Sahil was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and providing two sureties.
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Applicant Sahil is in judicial custody in FIR No. 305 of 2023, under Section 376, 376 (2), 511, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Rishikesh, District Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. According to the FIR, the applicant and the informant both were known to each other. On 24.06.2023, the applicant visited the house of the informant and pressurised her for marriage and also tried to establish physical relation with her. The informant resisted to it, but the FIR records that thereafter, the applicant abused and did maarpeet with the informant and also threatened her to life.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant and the informant, both are major. They were in relationship. The informant was married, but when she had discarded her matrimonial life. The informant wanted the applicant to marry her, but since the informant was not divorced from her earlier husband, the applicant declined to marry. Therefore, instant FIR has been lodged.
5. Learned State counsel would submit that the victim has supported the prosecution case during investigation.
6. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial or in any other proceedings.
7. The victim has told it to the Investigating Officer (“IO”) that she and the applicant were in relationship. Subsequently, she came to know about the religion of the applicant and she accepted the proposal of marriage given by the applicant, but her family members were against it. The informant has stated in detail to the IO.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
9. The bail application is allowed.
10. 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.
The court established that the nature of the relationship and the circumstances surrounding the allegations can influence the decision to grant bail, particularly when the victim supports the prosecu....
The court granted bail to the applicant under IPC Sections 376 and 506, emphasizing the need for conditions to protect the informant and ensure trial integrity.
The nature of the relationship between the accused and the victim can be a crucial factor in determining bail eligibility.
The court considered the lack of support from the victim and informant, along with forensic evidence, in granting bail to the applicant.
The court established that the determination of bail should consider the context of the relationship and the actions of the victim, while ensuring that the decision does not prejudice the trial.
The court established that in cases involving minors, the victim's consent and relationship dynamics can influence bail decisions, provided that safeguards against potential harm are implemented.
The court established that in cases involving serious allegations, the nature of the relationship between the accused and the victim, as well as the victim's statements, play a crucial role in determ....
In the absence of direct evidence linking the applicant to the crime, and where the prosecution's case relies on circumstantial evidence, bail may be granted.
Interim bail may be granted in sexual assault cases based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court's discretion in granting bail based on the circumstances of the case and the applicant's eligibility for bail.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
