2025:UHC:9639 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2/155/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Abhishek Verma and Mr. Arjun Arora, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V. S. Pal, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. This is second bail application. First bail application was converted into short term bail and Short term bail was granted for a period of one month and now, the applicant has already surrendered and moved this second bail application. 4. This second bail application has been moved by the applicant “Rajpal, son of Kishan Singh” praying for bail in relation to FIR dated 17.08.2024 bearing FIR No. 517 of 2024, Police Station – Patel Nagar, District Dehradun lodged by Digamber Singh Chauhan against unknown persons for the offences punishable under Section 5 (g) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act and under Section 70 (3), 127 (2) and 238 (3) (5) of BNS, 2023. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that present case is glaring example of false implication, which is evident from the fact that alleged incident, as shown in the FIR was of 13.08.2024 at 03.43 a.m. whereas FIR has been lodged after four days i.e. on 17.08.2024. He further submits that applicant was arrested on 19.08.2024 by showing it to be gang rape though as per medical report, there is no any sign of injury on the body of the victim. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR and he has not misused the short term bail granted earlier. 7. On perusal of the medical report, it appears that there is no internal and external injury on the body of the victim. 8. By giving reference of the injury report, 2025:UHC:9639 learned counsel for the applicant submits that even medical report does not support the case of the prosecution. He further submits that charge sheet has been filed in a very causal manner though there is great contradictions on the statement of the victim, who in every stage changed her version with regard to place of occurrence. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that applicant is languishing in jail since 19.08.2024 and charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant and as such, applicant be released on bail. It is further argued that in fact, as per own version of the victim, she is married, therefore, there is serious doubt on the age of the victim and furthermore, applicant has no previous criminal history. 9. On the other side, learned A.G.A. Mr. V.S. Pal, have vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that during TIP all these accused were identified by the victim and even, as per forensic report, semen of three accused namely Dharmendra Kumar, Rajpal and Rajesh Kumar Sonkar were found on the clothes of the victim, however, he has not disputed that applicant is languishing in jail since 19.08.2024 and charge sheet has already been filed on 05.09.2024 and trial is going on, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicants and applicant has no previous criminal history. 10. With regard to the forensic report, learned counsel for the applicant submits that merely on the ground of forensic report, which is subject matter of trial, at this stage, bail cannot be denied. 11. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.08.2024 and charge sheet has already been filed on 05.09.2024 and applicant has no previous criminal history, this Court is of the view that the applicants deserve for bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case all the bail applications are allowed. 13. Let the applicant “Rajpal, son of Kishan Singh” be released on bail on furnishing his 2025:UHC:9639 personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 14. It is made clear that after being released on bail, applicant shall join the trial proceedings on each and every date and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, failing which the trial court shall be at liberty to take appropriate legal action against the applicant including for cancellation of bail. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 31.10.2025 SKS