Mukesh Singh Bora vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0170 of 2024, under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 IPC and Section 9(m)/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“the Act”), Police Station Lalkuan, District Nainital.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

At the very outset, learned State Counsel submits that the anticipatory bail application is not maintainable in view of the State of Uttarakhand Notification Dated 111.08.2020, which, inter alia, provides that the provision of anticipatory bail shall not be applicable to the offences under the Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the offence under the Act is not made out; it is not stated in the FIR; on the basis of the statement taken by the Investigating Officer, the offences under the Act have been included. Therefore, the application is maintainable.

Learned State Counsel would submit that during her examination, the informant has stated that the applicant also committed the offence under the provision of the Act with her daughter; the victim girl child has also been examined during investigation before the Court.

The provisions of anticipatory bail are not applicable to the offences under the Act. The investigation in the instant matter is pending under the provisions of the Act. It is stated that even the victim child has been examined during investigation. In view of it, the anticipatory bail application is not maintainable. It deserves to be rejected accordingly.

The anticipatory bail application is rejected.