IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Ist Bail Application No.608 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Pankaj Kumar S/o Mamchand R/o House No.486, Tibdi, P.S. Ranipur, District Haridwar ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: June 29, 2010 ____________________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.26 of 2010 Under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC P.S. Ranipur, District Haridwar ________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mr. S.K. Shandiliya, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Additional Government Advocate for the State. In brief, the prosecution story is that Om Prakash lodged a report at Police Station Ranipur, District Haridwar on 21.1.2010 at 9:30 Pm stating that on 21.1.2010 at 4 PM when her daughter Km. Anushka, aged about 8 years, went to tuition with her friend Km. Ritu, she was kidnapped by two unknown persons. On the same day viz. 21/22.1.2010 at 1 AM the girl was recovered from the bushes near Arya Samaj Mandir. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR and he has falsely been implicated in the alleged crime. Contrary to this, learned Addl. GA for the State while opposing the bail application of the applicant argued that though initially FIR was lodged against unknown persons but during the course of investigation, on 24.1.2010 when the applicant Pankaj Kumar along with co-accused Amit Kumar was arrested by the police, witness Km. Ritu identified both the accused persons and told that they had kidnapped Km. Anushka on the alleged date and time. He further argued that it is a matter of gang rape and the applicant-accused along with other co-accused Amit Kumar committed rape with the victim Km. Anushka, aged about 8 years i.e. a minor girl. He further argued that the allegation of rape gets full corroboration from the medical report. Further, in the statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C., the complainant and the victim have fully supported the prosecution case. After considering the above-said facts and circumstances, on hearing learned counsel for the parties, contents of the FIR and other papers available on record and also considering the fact that it is a matter of gang rape and the applicant committed rape with Km. Anushka, who was aged about 8 years, a minor girl, no case for bail is made out. The bail application is liable to be rejected and is accordingly rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 29.06.2010 RG