2025:UHC:11426 I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 1 9 TH DECEMBER, 2 0 2 5 FI RST BAI L APPLI CATI ON NO. 1 4 6 9 of 2 0 2 5 Vishal ..…Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate. Hon ’ble Alok Ku m ar Ver m a,J. The applicant – Vishal is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 64(2)(m), Section 87, Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 5(j)(ii), Section 5(l) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in Case Crime No.676 of 2024, registered at Kotwali Gangnahar, District Haridwar. 2 . Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent. 3 . Mr. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate, for the applicant, contended that the allegations of the prosecution are totally false. The applicant was not involved in the said offences. As per the prosecution, the alleged offences were committed in the year, 2024, whereas, as per the 1 2025:UHC:11426 Parivar Register (Annexure No.7), the alleged victim was born in the year, 2005. The alleged victim, aged about 21 years (PW1) has not supported the case of the prosecution. Applicant is in custody since 01.02.2025. He has no criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding. 4 . Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he conceded that the victim (PW1) did not support the case of the prosecution. 5 . The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 6 . Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 7 . The Bail Application is allowed. 2 2025:UHC:11426 8 . Let the applicant – Vishal be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt: 19.12.2025 Pant/ 3