IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 16th day of November, 2011 1st Bail Application No.919 of 2011 Order on the Bail Application: CRIMINAL SIDE Vijendra Singh S/o Randeep Singh Resident of Village-Fidogi, Patti-Dashjyula, Tehsil-Dhanolti, District-Tehri Garhwal. ………Applicant Versus tate of Uttarakhand …… Opposite Party S Arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2011 Under Section 292, 384 I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, Revenue Police tation-Dhanolti, District- Tehri Garhwal. S Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate, present for the applicant. Mr. Hari Om Bhakuni, Brief Holder, present for the State. Heard. Applicant Vijendra Singh, who is in jail in connection with Crime No. 02 of 2011, relating to offences punishable under Section 292, 384 I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, registered at Revenue Police Station- Dhanolti, District Tehri Garhwal, has sought his release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that during investigation, it is revealed that the daughter-in-law of the complainant had illicit relations with the applicant for two 2 years, and she never disclosed her relationship nor ever complained that any film was made or obscene photographs were taken. The complaint has been lodged by the father-in- law of the woman. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the story of extortion is totally false. In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this court is of the view that applicant deserves bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Vijendra Singh, be released on bail, on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 16.11.2011 JM