- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 27 October 2010
- Bench
- A.K. Pathak
- Case no.
- BAIL APPLN. 1632/2010
Follow Delhi High CourtFollow A.K. Pathak
Judgment
#5 %
27.10.2010 Present: Mr. O.N. Sharnna, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. Manoj Ohri, APR for the State. +B.A.NO.1632/2010 * Prosecutrix was found missing by her father, therefore, he loged a complaint with the police, pursuant whereof, FIR under Section 363 IPG was recorded. He stated in the FIR that his daughter was aged about 14 years and was missing since 25.03.2009. Prosecutrix and petitioner arrived in the police station of their own on
28.03.2009 i.e. after three days and petitioner was arrested. Statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she has given her age about 17 years 9 months. Before the Magistrate she disclosed her date of birth as 08.07.1991. In her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that her step-mother used to mal treat her, consequently, she accompanied the petitioner on her own free will on 25.03.2009 and stayed with him. She Page 1 of3 Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. was in love with the petitioner. However, while deposing in the court she has stated that she was taken by the petitioner with him against her wishes. Learned APP submits that as per the school record date / of birth of prosecutrix is 12.07.1995. The age of prosecutrix was also got determined through radiologywhich was found between 14 ¥2 years and 15 ¥2 years. According to him prosecutrix was about 14 years old as on the date of incident. Keeping in mind the totality of the circumstances as also the fact that the prosecutrix had reached the age, in as much as, no conclusive material indicating exact date of birth of the prosecutrix could be collected; as also keeping in mind her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., I admit the petitioner to bail, who is in incarceration for about iy2 years, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum ?10,000/- with one surety in like amount to the satisfaction of trial court. ®^ •f i"
¶3v^' r'\ Petition is disposed of accordingly. October 27, 2010 mr A.K. PATHAK,J. Page 3 of3
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.