Padam Thapa vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant-Padam Thapa is in judicial custody in Case Crime No. 0199 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201, 364, 376 (AB), 376 (BD)/34 of IPC & Section 5 (e)/6 of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Deceased a young girl of 10 years, left her house on 05.08.2019. Thereafter, she was not traceable. Therefore, a report was lodged by her father. During investigation, the applicant was spotted with the victim. CCTV footages upto late evening at 8:40 p.m. were taken into possession by the police. When interrogated, it is the case of the police that applicant admitted that he along with co-accused raped the victim and killed her. It is further case of the prosecution that the dead body of the victim was recovered at the instance of the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no eye witness; there is no direct evidence and based on the circumstantial evidence, applicant has been arrested.

Learned State Counsel would submit that the applicant has been spotted with the victim till late in the evening of 05.08.2019 last time and thereafter, her dead body was recovered on 07.08.2019 at the instance of the applicant.

This is not a case of direct evidence but there have been certificate of Section 65 B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with regard to the CCTV footages. Many questions would require deliberation at the trial as to where the victim had gone after she was spotted with the applicant at about 8:40 p.m. on 05.08.2019. The month of August is definitely dark. What was the victim doing with the applicant then? It is stated by the prosecution that the dead body was recovered at the instance of the applicant.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case for bail and the bail application deserves to be rejected.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.