Nafees Ahmad vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 316 of 2023, under Section 354 IPC and Section 9/10 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This is second bail application of the applicant. His first bail application was rejected on merits on 21.03.2024.

According to the FIR, the applicant was a Lecturer in a school. He was molesting the girl students in the school. A report was lodged. Various girls students have stated that the applicant was molesting them and proposed them to have intimate relations.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is in custody for the last 18 months; there are total 33 witnesses, out which only seven witnesses have been examined; there are six victim, but out of them, only four have not supported the prosecution case and the statements of the remaining two are contradictory on material particulars. He would refer to the statement of victim nos. 1 and 2 to argue that with regard to the place of incident and the timing, their statements are not supportive in material particulars.

Learned State counsel would submit that the remaining two victims have supported the prosecution case. But, he admits that four victims have not supported the prosecution case. He also admits that there are 33 witnesses listed by the prosecution, out of which only 7 witnesses have been examined.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.