IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Criminal Bail Application No.130 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE Sanjeev ……….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party ________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.88 of 2009, U/s 363/366/376 IPC, P.S. Gadarpur, Distt. U.S. Nagar Dated: March 9, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Pratiroop Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for the State. In brief the prosecution case is that on 15.5.2009, the applicant along with co-accused Uttam, Jagdish, Bankim, Dipankar, Pankaj and Sarot had taken complainant’s daughter Km. Kavita, his daughter in law Smt. Durga and grand daughter Kiran by enticing. With the same averments, FIR was lodged by Neelkanth, father of the victim Kavita on 6.6.2009 at 5:40 PM at P.S. Gadarpur. Later on, Smt. Durga, Kavita and Kiran were recovered from the possession of the present applicant-Sanjeev and that of co-accused Uttam on 28.8.2009. The medical examination of Smt. Durga and Kavita were also been done. In the statement of victim Km. Kavita recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., she stated that the applicant Sanjeev wanted to get her married and also wanted to sell her but he could not be successful. The applicant also committed bad work with her against her wishes. On a perusal of the statement of Kavita, it transpires that the applicant tried to sell the victim and also committed bad work with her against her wishes. The medical officer has also opined the age of victim above 16 years and below 18 years on the date of incident which means she was minor on the date of occurrence. It further comes out that the applicant committed rape with the victim against her wishes. After considering all the facts and circumstances, particularly considering the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. as well on perusal of the contents of the FIR, I am of the view that the applicant is not entitled for bail at this stage. The bail application is thus rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 09.03.2010 Rajeev Dang