2025:UHC:2651 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. 364 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned AAG assisted by Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned AGA and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant–Ajay Saini is in judicial custody since 27.09.2024 and seeking bail in relation to FIR/Case Crime No.0434 of 2024, registered on the basis of FIR dated 27.08.2024 at Police Station Gangnahar, District Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 376 and 506 IPC. After investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed for the offence punishable under Section 376 and 506 read with Section 67-B IT Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and he is languishing in jail since 27.09.2024, and, furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant. Apart from this, he submits that at the time of arrest of the present applicant, no ground of arrest was provided to the present applicant, which, in fact, is the mandate of Section 50 of Cr.P.C as well as the mandate of Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India. The present applicant is entitled for bail in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Vihaan Kumar 2025:UHC:2651 versus State of Haryana and another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 269. 5. On the other side, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned AAG submits that the ground of arrest was provided at the time of arrest which is strictly as per the mandate of Section 50 of the Cr.P.C., however, he has not disputed this fact that the charge- sheet has already been filed and therefore at this juncture, there is no need of the custodial interrogation of the applicant. 6. After hearing the arguments, as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that since the charge-sheet has already been filed and as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant, namely, Ajay Saini, 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. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 08.04.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:2651