LAL MOHAMMAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present Criminal Misc. Application has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:

(2.) Facts, in brief, are that first information report was lodged by the complainant on 01.07.2017 at Police Station Banbhoolpura, Haldwani, District Nainital stating therein that her daughter, namely, Chandni, aged about 16 years, left her house without informing anybody. She was searched in relation, but, was not found. It was also stated in the F.I.R. that the applicant was a tenant in their house and he also went missing from that day. In the F.I.R., the complainant apprehended that the applicant had enticed away her daughter. Applicant was arrested. Thereafter, investigation was carried out and after conclusion of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet against the applicant. The trial, bearing Special Sessions Trial No. 54 of 2017, 'State Vs. Lal Mohammed', is in progress under Section 376, 363, 366 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act before the learned Special Judge, POCSO/ Fast Track Court, Haldwani, District Nainital. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Thereafter, applicant moved an application seeking bail before the learned Special Judge, POCSO, which was dismissed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO on 23.12017. Thereafter, applicant approached this Court for grant of bail. On 21.02018, applicant was granted bail by this Court by considering the statement of the prosecutrix given before the trial Court.

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that that the applicant has falsely been implicated by the police under Section 366, 376, 363 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act. He submitted that the mother of the prosecutrix was examined as P.W.-1 and the prosecutrix was examined as P.W.-2. None of them has supported the version of the prosecution. He referred the statement of the mother of the prosecutrix given before the trial Court in which she has stated that she had not been told by anyone that her daughter had gone with the applicant. He also referred the statement of the prosecutrix given before the trial Court, in which she stated that on 28.06.2017 she had not gone with the applicant and the applicant had never made any physical relation with her. She further stated that on 02.07.2017 she was coming from Pilibhit to Haldwani and when she reached Haldwani Roadways Station, the police caught her. At that time, the applicant was not with her. In her statement, she also stated that the statement given by her before the Magistrate was under the influence of the police personnel.