SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010126012025 BA1/1471/2025 Lalit --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Vinod Sharma and Mr. Kamlesh Budhlakoti, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned AGA for the State. 3. Present applicant “Lalit, son of late Mahendra”, is praying for regular bail in reference to FIR dated 14.05.2024 bearing FIR No. 203 of 2024 registered at Police Station – Raipur, District – Dehradun, wherein present applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 376 AB IPC and under Section 3 (d) / 4 of the POCSO Act. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, which is evident from the statement of doctor, who was examined by the trial court as PW5 on 06.08.2025. The doctor has categorically stated that there is no injury mark and there is no sign of sexual assault. The statement of doctor is enclosed as Annexure 4 to the supplementary affidavit. He further submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 14.05.2024 and has no previous criminal antecedents and there are 9 prosecution witnesses, out of which, till date only 6 prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no possibility that trial would be expedited soon. He further submits that applicant has already suffered long incarceration of 2 years and two month. 5. On the other side, learned State Counsel have not disputed that applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 14.05.2024 and out of 9 prosecution witnesses, only six prosecution witnesses have been examined, however, he fairly submits that the doctor has not fully supported the case of prosecution. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 14.05.2024 and out of the 9 prosecution witnesses, till date only 6 prosecution witnesses have been examined, therefore, there is no possibility that trial would be expedited soon and the applicant has already suffered long incarceration of 2 years and two month and furthermore, doctor has not fully support the case of prosecution, this Court is of the view that 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 “Lalit, son of late Mahendra”, be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following condition: i. After being released on bail, applicant shall join the trial court proceedings on each and every date without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. ii. He shall surrender his passport, if any, in the trial court. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 22.07.2026 SKS