2025:UHC:10358 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No.1981 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mohd. Umar and Mr. Sajjad Ahmad, Advocates for the applicant. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This first bail application has been moved by the applicant seeking regular bail in Case Crime/F.I.R. No.508 of 2024, under Sections 376(3), 376(2)(ढ ), 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(क)/4 (ii), 5ठ , 5(ts)(ii)/6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar. 3. The F.I.R. was lodged by the sister of the victim alleging that the applicant used to call the victim to his house on the pretext of engaging her in household work and, during such occasions, subjected her to sexual assault. It is further alleged that when the complainant noticed physical changes in the victim, she took her for medical examination, where it was revealed that the victim was approximately 20–24 weeks pregnant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, has no criminal antecedents, and is in judicial custody since 30.06.2024. He submits that the victim subsequently delivered a male child and the D.N.A. profiles of the infant, the victim, and the applicant were obtained during investigation. It is argued that the D.N.A. report conclusively records that the D.N.A. of the infant does not match with that of the applicant, thereby demolishing the prosecution case. Learned counsel further contends that although in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the 2025:UHC:10358 victim has alleged that the applicant subjected her to sexual assault for the last 8–9 months, the said statement suffers from material inconsistencies and contradictions, rendering it unreliable and unworthy of credence. It is lastly submitted that in the absence of any medical or scientific evidence connecting the applicant with the alleged offence, his continued incarceration is wholly unwarranted. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. and the statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. clearly disclose the commission of serious and grave offences of sexual assault upon a minor girl, which carry severe punishment. 6. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail at this stage. 7. The bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant, namely, Deen Mohammad @ Dinna be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. (Alok Mahra, J.) 20.11.2025 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c04853 65445e3a20dddb7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D 454C5109CB987446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66 , cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2025.11.20 18:00:16 +05'30'