2025:UHC:1395 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. 354 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Ruchika Negi, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Akshay Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Irfan Salmani’ is in a judicial custody in relation to a Case Crime No. 08 of 2024 registered on the basis of First Information Report dated 03.02.2024, which was lodged against the unknown persons for the offence punishable under Section 365 of IPC. 4. As per the allegations alleged in the FIR the victims, who were minor were missing. After thorough investigation the chargesheet was filed under Sections 354, 363, 376 of IPC and Section 3/4 and 7/8 of POCSO Act, wherein, the cognizance was taken by the Special Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, on 03.04.2024 against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 376 of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the applicant was in love relationship with the victim and thereafter she was tutored by her family members to give a false statement. 6. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the age of the accused is not established as he was born in 2005 whereas the certificate issued by Gram Panchayat Tisua shows that the date of birth is 05.10.2006, in support of which birth certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan dated 31.12.2024 is also enclosed. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant at the time of incident was 17 years 3 months and 27 days and was a juvenile. 8. On the other side, Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned A.G.A. submits that the victim on her statement 2025:UHC:1395 recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. supports the prosecution and not only this even the medical report also support. 9. Apart from this, he submits that after taking cognizance the charge has also been framed against the applicant. He submits that the allegation as alleged are very serious in nature and after collecting credible evidence including the medical report the chargesheet has been filed. 10. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and after taking into consideration that the victim, who was minor also supports the prosecution, and furthermore medical report prima facie constitute the offence against the applicant. This court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve for bail. 11. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.02.2025 PR 2025:UHC:1395