2025:UHC:10837 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 / 1 7 0 4 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy A.G. along with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant–Aas Mohammed, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 84 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 64 BNS and 3(a)/4(2) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(v) of the S.C./S.T. Act 1989 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Roorkee District Haridwar has sought his release on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Initially, a missing report was filed by the father of the victim, alleging that he had dropped both his daughters at school. Later, the school authorities telephonically informed him that his elder daughter, aged about 16 years, was not present in the school. During investigation, the applicant was recovered on 08.03.2025 from P.S. Selakui, Dehradun. The said missing report was subsequently converted into an F.I.R. against the applicant. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He stated that in her statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S., the victim mentioned that she has known the applicant for about a year and used to communicate with him telephonically. She further stated that she 2025:UHC:10837 left school to meet the applicant with sweets and expressed her desire to marry him. She went with the applicant to the house of the applicant’s brother, who told them to return the victim home. Subsequently, the applicant took her to Selakui, booked a room, and allegedly engaged in physical relations with the victim. On the same night, the police arrived and brought them to the police station. 8. He would further submit that in her later statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S., the victim changed her version and stated that the key to the room was not provided; therefore, they sat on the stairs where the alleged act occurred. This constitutes a clear contradiction between the two statements. Moreover, the medical examination of the victim did not detect any live spermatozoa in the vaginal smear, indicating that no physical relation occurred. The FSL report is still pending. 9. Learned counsel further stated that the applicant and the victim were in a romantic relationship. At the time of the incident, the applicant was 21 years old and the victim was 16. Even if it is assumed that any physical relations took place, they were consensual. The victim, being 16, was mature enough to understand her actions and their consequences. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 08.03.2025, and the lower court had rejected his bail on 11.08.2025. Since the applicant is still very young, continued detention could seriously affect his future. Considering that the trial may take a long time, the counsel requested that he be released on bail. 10. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the bail application, citing the 2025:UHC:10837 seriousness of the allegations. However, he admitted that the FSL report is still awaited. He also acknowledged that the applicant has been in custody since 08.03.2025 and that the lower court had earlier rejected the bail application on 11.08.2025. 11. Having considered the submissions of both parties, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, the first bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. ( Alok Mahr a, J.) 05.12.2025 Mamta 2025:UHC:10837