2025:UHC:2318 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/510/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Ms. Pushpa Joshi, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Chetna Latwal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned Assistant Government Advocate with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 29.06.2024 bearing FIR No. 0219 of 2024, registered at Police Station – Ram Nagar, District – Nainital, for the offences punishable under Section 366, 363, 376 (2) (n) IPC and under Section 5 (l) / 6 of the POCSO Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. She further submits that in fact, the applicant was in love with the victim, daughter of the complainant and applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail for the last six months. She further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation. 5. On the previous date, State Counsel was directed to get instructions in the matter and now, learned AGA for the State has placed before this Court the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. 6. On perusal of the statement of the victim recorded, it appears that victim has not supported the prosecution case rather she admits that she was in love with the present applicant and whatever be the physical relations have been developed between them the same was consensual. 7. Apart from this, learned AGA fairly admits that since charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration the 2025:UHC:2318 statement of the victim and the fact that charge- sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant “Deepak Kumar” be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.03.2025 SKS