Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3873 (UTT)

ARVIND v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/424/2025 · 2025-06-06

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:4651 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/424/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Present applicant- Arvind, S/o Jaypal Singh is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 28.04.2025, registered as FIR No. 115 of 2024 at P.S. Kankhal, District Haridwar which was lodged against the unknown person for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) IPC read with Section 5(l)/6 of the POCSO Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, and, in fact the applicant was in love with the victim which she admits in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that victim herself refused to go with the medical examination which is evident from the medico legal report, annexed as Annexure 11 to the counter affidavit. Apart from this, he submits that charge sheet has already been filed and applicant is languishing in jail since 29.09.2024 and the trial has been commenced and up till date only four prosecution witnesses have already been examined. 5. Learned State counsel has not disputed this fact that charge sheet has already been filed and the trial has also been commenced and applicant is languishing in jail since 29.09.2024. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the charge sheet has already been filed and the 2025:UHC:4651 applicant is languishing in jail since 29.09.2024 and the trial has already been commenced, therefore, there is no useful purpose to detain the applicant in custody, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Arvind be released bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 06.06.2025 Parul