IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Criminal Ist Bail Application No.880 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused CRIMINAL SIDE Brij Kishore Jha ……….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand ------- Opposite party ________________________________________________________ Arising out of FIR No.194 of 2010, U/s 363/366/376 IPC, P.S. Rudrapur, Distt. US Nagar Dated: September 29, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri MK Ray, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Additional G.A. for the State. In brief the prosecution case is that on 10.4.2010, when the complainant’s wife had gone to the market, at that time the applicant/accused took away the complainant’s daughter Km. Anita by enticing her. The age of the victim was mentioned as 12 years. The victim was recovered on 31.5.2010. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated. On the contrary, learned Addl. GA for the State produced the date of birth certificate of the victim Km. Anita in which her date of birth has been mentioned as 15.8.1998, according to which the victim is aged about 12 years on the date of the incident. He further submitted that during investigation, the I.O. has recorded the statement of the victim u/s 161 Cr.P.C., wherein she stated that the applicant/accused had enticed away and during the period she stayed with him, the applicant/accused committed rape with her forcibly against her wishes. He further submitted that the victim was also medically been examined and the medical evidence also corroborates the prosecution version. Thus, on a perusal of the date of birth certificate, it reveals that the victim was aged about 12 years, which means that she was minor on the date of incident and she was enticed away by the applicant and thereafter, the applicant/accused committed rape with her forcibly against her wishes and this fact has also been stated by the victim in her statement recorded u/s 161 After considering the above-said facts and circumstances, on hearing learned counsel for the parties, contents of the FIR and other papers available on record and also considering the fact that the victim is minor i.e. 12 years of age and the statements of the victim recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. as well as the medical evidence, it is not a fit case where the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is liable to be rejected and is accordingly rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) 29.09.2010 Rajeev Dang