Preeti @ Preet vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant Preeti @ Preet is in judicial custody in FIR No.152 of 2023, under Sections 363, 377 IPC and Section 5(l)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Bhagwanpur, District-Haridwar. She has sought her release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, the applicant enticed a young girl of 17 years of age from her house. It is the case of the prosecution that, subsequently, when the victim was recovered, she revealed that she was in love with the applicant. They both had established physical relations. Initially, the victim had objected to the activities of the applicant on the ground that she being woman, how could they marry. But the statement of the victim, recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, reveals that at it, the applicant had replied that she would remove her breasts.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the arrest is doubtful; the age of the victim is not established.

Learned State Counsel would submit that the victim is minor; she has supported the prosecution case.

It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial, or in any other proceeding.

At the stage of bail, various factors are taken into consideration, including the gravity of offence, the nature of offence, the position of the offender and the victim, the antecedents, etc. The applicant is an accused of sexually assaulting the victim, a young girl. Applicant herself is a woman. The statement of the victim and other witnesses reveals that the applicant had been behaving differently. She fell in love with the victim and when initially objected to by the victim, she said that, in fact, she would remove her breasts. Does it mean that it was a case of Gender Disorder or Gender Dysphoria? If it is so, it means that the applicant had been struggling with her body. She (he?) was felt confined in a body, which she was not psychologically in consonance.

Having considered this factor gravely, 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 her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.