IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Ist Bail Application No.328 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Harish Singh S/o Kedar Singh R/o Village Asaon Patwari Kshetra Asoan Sub Tehsil Kafligair, District Bageshwar ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: April 5, 2010 Arising out of Case Crime No.1 of 2010 Under sections 323, 354, 376 and 506 of IPC At Nayab Tehsildar Kshetra Kafligair, District Bageshwar Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri Ganesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and also perused the record. In brief, the prosecution story is that the complainant Laxman Singh lodged an FIR on 10.2.2010 with the averments that on 09.02.2010 the applicant/accused has tried to commit rape with his niece forcibly and on her hue and cry when the mother of the victim reached at the place of incident then the accused/applicant ran away from the spot by threatening them. The State has filed its counter affidavit along with which the statement of victim Km. Asha recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. is annexed, in which she has stated that on 9.2.2010 at about 4:30 PM she was coming back to her house from school. When she reached near Ratgada then the applicant/accused caught her and committed rape with her. When she tried to save herself from the applicant/accused then the applicant/accused also caused injuries to her. She was late in going to her house therefore her mother had reached Ratgada to search her. On seeing her mother, the applicant/accused ran away from there by threatening her. The statement of Mohini Devi, mother of the victim, is also annexed with the counter affidavit and she has also supported the statement of the victim. Marksheet for showing date of birth certificate of the victim has also been annexed with the counter affidavit in which the date of birth of the victim has been mentioned as 5.6.1993 which clearly shows that she was about 16 years of age on the date of incident. Learned counsel for the applicant/accused has argued that the applicant/accused has falsely been implicated in the said case. Contrary to this, learned Addl. GA for the State strongly opposed the bail of the applicant/accused and stated that the applicant/accused has committed rape with the victim Km. Asha about which the victim has specifically stated in her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. The statement of the victim also gets corroboration from the medical report as well as from the statement of her mother Smt. Mohini Devi. After considering all the facts and circumstances; on hearing learned counsel for the parties; perusing the contents of FIR; statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. as well as on perusal of the marksheet showing the date of birth of the victim; I am of the view that the applicant does not deserve bail. The bail application is rejected accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 05.04.2010 RG