Mother Accused Of Receiving ₹80,000 In Minor Daughter’s Alleged Sale Gets Bail As Uttarakhand HC Notes No Independent Proof Of Payment

The applicant, the victim’s mother and the complainant, was in judicial custody in connection with an FIR alleging offences under Sections 64 read with 3(5), 87 and 143 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 16/17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

The complainant reported her approximately 15½-year-old daughter missing; the victim was later recovered.

The investigation alleged that co-accused Pinky and Lavi took the victim to Muzaffarnagar, forced her to marry Manish, and sold her to him for ₹1,50,000.

The applicant’s alleged receipt of ₹80,000 was based on a co-accused’s statement.

The applicant argued that there was no independent evidence of payment, relied on the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and noted that Pinky and Lavi had been granted bail.

The State opposed bail.

The charges invoked Sections 64 read with 3(5), 87 and 143 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 16/17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

The Court also considered the victim’s statement recorded under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

In deciding bail, the Court assessed the material supporting the allegation against the applicant, the victim’s statement, and the fact that co-accused had been released on bail.

The order cites no precedent or separate statutory provision governing the bail decision.

The Court found that the alleged payment of ₹80,000 to the applicant was primarily supported by the co-accused’s statement, with no independent material brought to its attention to substantiate the payment.

It also considered the victim’s Section 183 BNSS statement and the fact that Pinky and Lavi had already been granted bail.

On the overall circumstances, it concluded that the applicant had made out a case for bail.

It directed that the applicant be released on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of like amount, subject to conditions requiring attendance at trial, prohibiting unnecessary adjournments and interference with witnesses, and barring departure from India without the Trial Court’s permission.

The complainant or informant may seek cancellation of bail in the event of misuse of liberty or breach of conditions.