LALIT MOHAN ARYA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.S. Sammal, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the alleged incident is said to have taken place on 10.6.2010, however the FIR was lodged on 19.8.2010, i.e., after two months and nine days and the delay in lodging the FIR has not been explained by the prosecution. He further submitted that as per the medical report, age of victim is about 16 years and it is settled law that two years' margin either on the upper side or lower side may be taken. Thus, if two years' margin is given on the higher side, then the victim is major on the date of incident. He further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case due to some family dispute between the parties.

(3.) After considering all the facts and circumstances; on hearing learned counsel for the parties; on perusal of the contents of the FIR and other papers available on record, without expressing any opinion about the final merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the present applicant deserves bail at this stage.