No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 2540 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey and Mr. Pritish Arya, learned counsels for the applicant. 2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant – Abdul Rauf, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 218 of 2025, under Sections 5(l)/6 of POCSO, Sections 3 and 5 of Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act and Sections 115, 351(2), 64(2)(m), 65(1) and Section 89 of BNS, registered at P.S.- Ramnagar, District Nainital, has sought his release on bail. 4. In this case, an FIR was lodged by parental aunt (bua), wherein, it is alleged that the applicant became friend with the victim in the year 2022 and thereafter taking advantage of this friendship, applicant made physical relations with the victim from the year 2023. In the FIR, it is further alleged that the applicant is coercing the victim to change her religion to Islam and if the victim would not convert to Islam, then he would not marry her. 5. It is the case of the applicant that in her statement under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS, the victim has submitted that applicant and victim were friends and even they made physical relations with their consent, but, when she went to meet the father of the applicant and requested him to marry the applicant, then his father told her that since they both belong to different religion, their marriage is not possible. Thereafter, looking into the seriousness of the matter, applicant was sent from Ramnagar to some other place, so that he could not meet the victim. It is further the case of the applicant that father of the applicant had also lodged an FIR on 04.07.2025, wherein, the statements given by the victim under Section 180 of BNSS corroborated that the cut-marks in her left arm was self-inflicted and the victim had also admitted the fact that she is in love with the applicant and she desperately want to marry him and when father of the applicant was not agreed for the marriage, she pelted stones on the house of the applicant. 6. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that as far as allegation of changing her religion is concerned, the Investigating Officer did not find this allegation to be true and the allegation of blackmailing the victim by the applicant through a fake I.D. was also not found to be true by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that applicant is languishing in jail since 23.06.2025 and complainant and the victim have been examined as PW-1 and PW2, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidences or influencing the witnesses. 7. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. Considering the fact that since complainant and the victim have been examined as PW-1 and PW2 and there is no chance of tampering with the evidences or influencing the witnesses, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. (Alok Mahra J.) 24.04.2026 Ujjwal