IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Criminal Bail Application No.264 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE Kallu @ Pravesh @ another ……….Applicants (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party ________________________________________________________ Arising out of Case Crime No.63 of 2009, U/s 376/506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Laksar, Distt. Haridwar Dated: March 9, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for the State. In brief the prosecution case is that the applicants/accused Kallu and Sandeep had committed rape with the victim Km. Menka on 10.3.2009 at about 1:30 PM. The FIR of the said incident was lodged by Narendra Singh, father of victim on 12.3.2009. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants-accused have been implicated due to the village enmity and they are in jail since last one year. Contrary to this, learned State counsel argued that it is a matter of gang rape where the rape was committed forcibly with the victim against her wishes by these applicants and the allegations made in the FIR also gets corroboration from the medical report of the victim. In the medical report, it has been stated that there was possibility of rape committed with the victim Km. Menka and the age of the victim is below sixteen years. The victim has also reiterated the same facts about the commission of rape by the applicants in her statement recorded before the Magistrate u/s 164 Cr.P.C. Even as per the certificate issued by Govt. Junior High School, Bahadarabad Haridwar dated 24.3.2009, the date of birth of victim is mentioned as 2.8.1995. Incident is said to be happened on 10.3.2009 and in this way, the victim was about 14 years of age on the date of incident. After considering the above-said facts and circumstances, on hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of the medical report of the victim, contents of the FIR and other papers available on record as well as considering the fact that it was a gang rape and the victim was minor, it is not a fit case where the applicants are entitled for bail. The bail application is liable to be rejected and is accordingly rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 09.03.2010 Rajeev Dang