DEVENDRA KUMAR ALIAS DEVENDRA THAKUR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
BA1/2424/2025 · 2026-02-24
Alok Mahra
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 347 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 347 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
BA1 No. 2424 of 2025 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J.
Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned D.A.G. for the State.
3. The applicant – Devendra Kumar @ Devendra Thakur, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR/ Case Crime No. 0052 of 2025, under Section 65(2) of BNS and Section 5(m)(n)/ 6 and Section 9/ 10 of POCSO Act, registered at P.S.- Selaqui, District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail.
4. In this case, a complaint was filed by mother of the victim on 13.05.2025, wherein, she has alleged that the applicant/ second husband of the complainant has committed sexual assault upon her minor daughter aged about eight years. In the complaint, it is mentioned that when the victim came home from school, then the applicant inserted his finger in her private parts. Thereafter, the complainant lodged this complaint.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
6.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim, in her statement, has denied the stand, as narrated in the complaint.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the
applicant was in living relation with the complainant and due to his denial for marriage, the complainant has filed this FIR falsely implicating the applicant. It is further submitted that the victim was examined by the doctor and the medical report shows that hymen has not ruptured. It is also submitted that the complainant had earlier also filed such complaint against some other person alleging sexual assault on her elder daughter. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the doctor has also been examined in the Court and the doctor has reiterated that hymen of the victim was intact.
7. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application.
8. Having considered the submissions, under the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the medical report and the statement of the doctor that hymen of the victim was intact, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
9. The bail application is allowed.
10. 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 Mah r a J.)
24.02.2026 Ujjwal