2025:UHC:2788 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/208/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Vikas Pandey and Mr. Amit Kapri, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharath Bisht, learned Assistant Government Advocate and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned counsel for the State. 3. Present applicant is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 17.11.2024 bearing FIR No. 0056 of 2024, registered at Police Station – Dharchula, District – Pithoragarh wherein applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 143 (3) BNS, 2023. 4. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Section 65 (1), 140 (3) BNS, under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and under Section 3 / 4 of the POCSO Act. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He further submits that in fact, applicant married with victim on 16.11.2024 as per Hindu rites and rituals and it was an arranged marriage, which was arranged by sister of the victim. He further submits that even the victim in her statement, recorded under Section 183 BNSS, has not supported the prosecution case rather she has stated that she married with the applicant and at the time of her marriage, she was 18 years of age. 6. Apart from this, he submits that since the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant and applicant is languishing in jail since 07.12.2024. 7. On the other side, learned State Counsel submits that the actual date of birth of victim is 16.12.2009 and at the time of marriage, she was minor. He further submits that since the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no 2025:UHC:2788 need of custodial interrogation of the applicant. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that since the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant “Vikrant Rathi” be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 17.04.2025. SKS SATYENDR A KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SATYENDRA KUMAR SHARMA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=0ae29206736743e1dbac130112ec0e cf08e05510bf453a3831b775c37aaef013, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=D399BE9D4085860FEA4EC70D 33810048385B41426ED344626DCE3F13245A D17E, cn=SATYENDRA KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.04.22 10:19:07 +05'30' 2025:UHC:2788