SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2025:UHC:2622 BA 1st No.2377 of 2024 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant through VC. 2. Mr. Rakesh Negi, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Ravinder Singh, S/o Gajjan Singh, R/o Krishna Nagar P.S. Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The applicant is presently in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No.146 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2) of IPC and under Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act. 4. In the present matter, the mother of the victim filed a missing report of his minor daughter (victim), that she had been missing since 15.08.2023 from the school, and she tried to find and reach her at every place, but she could not find her whereabouts. On the basis of the missing report, the Police started searching for the missing girl (victim) and traced her ultimately from the custody of the present applicant-accused from Noida, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Thereafter, the case was instituted and registered as FIR/Case Crime No.146 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2) of IPC and under Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act. The applicant-accused is in judicial custody since 12.10.2023. 5. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the records. 6. At the outset, it is contended on behalf of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is implicated falsely in the present matter; applicant and the victim were in love relationship and the victim has not supported the prosecution story in her statement given under Section 164 CrPC, which was given before the Magistrate; there is no documentary evidence on record that may prove or even suggest that the applicant had kidnapped informant’s daughter and during the arguments of the bail application, it is also contended that there is nothing on record, at this stage, which indicates that the applicant had sexually assaulted the victim in any manner whatsoever. 7. It is further submitted by the applicant’s counsel that applicant is an innocent person, and has no previous criminal records, and is languishing in jail since 12.10.2023. The prosecution story is unbelievable based on concocted and fabricated facts. There is no DNA or FSL report, which would indicate that any sexual assault as alleged against the applicant and it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 8. It is also contended on behalf of the applicant that as per statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of CrPC of the victim, she has categorically denied the prosecution story that the applicant exploited her physically in any manner whatsoever. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, I do not find grounds sufficient for enlarging the applicant on bail. Firstly, In her statement recorded before the learned Trial Court, she has stated that the applicant took her on the motorcycle on the pretext of giving her joy ride, then he took her to his Aunt’s place at Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar, and after that he took her to Delhi by bus. She has categorically stated that despite her refusal to accompany the applicant, the applicant took her forcefully under a threat of killing her, then she further says that somewhere in Delhi, the applicant raped her many times despite her protest. Secondly, at this juncture it is evident that the case is made out against the accused/applicant was based on missing report filed by the victim’s mother, victim, who is a minor and because the victim was recovered from the custody of the applicant from Noida, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, which clearly indicates that the applicant kidnapped the victim and confided her in a place far away from her native place, and forcefully committed aggregative sexual intercourse that comes within the purview of rape and POCSO. 10. This Court is also of the view that if applicant is released on bail, it will be a threat to the victim and the reporter. 11. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Bail application stands dismissed accordingly. (Ashish Naithani, J) 08.04.2025 Nitesh/