2025:UHC:2760 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHISH NAITHANI 16th April, 2025 First Bail Appl. No.2020 of 2024 Itwari Lal …Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …Respondents Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Deepak Sharma, learned counsel through V.C. Counsel for the State : Mr. Vipul Painuli, learned AGA with Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime No.0145 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 376(3), IPC & 5(n), 6 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short the POCSO Act) registered at P.S. Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. Heard Mr. Deepak Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Rangoli Purohit, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. According to the prosecution story, as narrated in the FIR on 13.03.2024 during day time victim sent a message on her sister’s brother-in-law’s (Devar) phone and then made a video call to her sister. The victim told her sister while crying on phone that her step father (present applicant) made physical relationship 1 2025:UHC:2760 with her; beaten her and threatened to kill. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He submits that as per the statement of the victim she was continuously raped since 6 years but till now no FIR has been lodged by the victim. He further submits that applicant has no criminal history. 5. Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that victim is a minor girl and as per her statements she was raped by her step father (applicant) on the fateful day and she was continuously being raped by the applicant and was also assaulted by the applicant with Patal. He also submits that this fact was also proved from the medical report. He further submits that it is a heinous crime, hence applicant is not entitled for any relief and his bail application should be rejected. 6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that victim is a minor girl of tender age, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (ASHISH NAITHANI, J.) 16.04.2025 Arti 2 ARTI SINGH Digitally signed by ARTI SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=487ed955e722ba65aab55409e686c12fb83a19325e8b66890fbee418e7b69c0d, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26DC90E00D839E3E8714131F235087D2D87E133C57E7F4A7B2E734BE2521F982, cn=ARTI SINGH Date: 2025.07.02 15:17:51 +05'30'