UTTAM RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cause shown is sufficient. Delay in filing the counter affidavit is condoned. Delay condonation application (IA 2 of 2023) would stand allowed. Counter affidavit is taken on record.

(2.) Applicant Uttam Ram, who is in judicial custody in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 206 of 2022, under Sec. 354 I.P.C. and under Sec. 9/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Police Station Basant Bihar, District Dehradun has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record available on file.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is a glaring discrepancy and unexplained contradiction in the statement of the victim recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate; that, in the statement recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. she allegedly stated the name of the applicant/accused as the person who had hit her on chest and her brother thereafter trying to pull her inside the bathroom, whereas in her statement recorded under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate (at page no.44 to the bail application) she states that one person who is tenant in the courtyard of the house of the victim, whose name she does not know was standing near the bathroom, was tried to hit her and tried to pull her in the bathroom; that, there is no other allegation of any sexual assault as such against the applicant/accused.