HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated Nainital the 16th October, 2008 Bail Application No. 571 of 2008 Order on the bail application of the accused. Rajpal S/o Dhyan Singh ….… Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand …….. Opposite Party _____________________________________________________________ Case Crime No. 11 of 2008 U/s 363, 366, 376 and 506 I.P.C. Police Station Kashipur District Udham Singh Nagar Hon’ble J. C. S. Rawat, J. Heard Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate for the applicant, Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, Brief Holder for the State; and perused the record. It was contended on behalf of the accused/applicant that the statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. reveals at one place that no rape was committed upon the prosecutrix but in the last sentence of the statement it is stated that rape was committed upon her; no details of places when the commission of rape has been committed has been given in the evidence produced by the prosecution; self contradictory statement of the prosecutrix did not inspire confidence; such evidence is not credible and cogent; and the age of the girl is said to be 16 years on the date of the recording of the statement. It was further contended that the girl was a consenting party, as she was more than 16 years of age & she has sufficient time to make hue and cry when she was in the possession of the applicant from 30/12/2007 to 03/01/2008. Considering the facts and circumstances for the case in totality; contentions of the learned counsel for the parties; affidavit & the counter affidavit filed by the parties; and averment made in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., I find that it is a fit case for bail. Let the accused/applicant be released on bail during the pendency of the trail on executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate concerned. (J.S.C. Rawat, J.) Dated 16.10.2008 Shiv