2025:UHC:5617 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 No. 797 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Sharang Dhulia, learned counsel for the applicant through V.C. 2. Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant–Prashant Mehta S/o Shri Kushal Singh Mehta is seeking regular bail in relation to first information report dated 23.12.2024 bearing FIR No.0032 of 2024, Police Station Ranikhet, District Almora, which was lodged against unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 64 of the BNS, 2023. After completion of the investigation, the applicant has been charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 64 read with Section 351(1) of the BNS, 2023. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the entire allegation, as alleged in the FIR, is nothing, but a concocted story. He further submits that whatever be the relation, developed in between both of them, is consensual, since the victim knows the applicant very well. 5. He also submits that though in the FIR, it has been alleged that she has not seen the accused person, who committed the crime, but subsequently, when she was examined in the Court as PW-1, she clearly stated that the applicant is a Soldier in Army and he was deputed on duty in front of the House of the Commanding Officer, which is at a distance of 100 meter from the house of the victim, where she is residing, and the applicant regularly passes from that place. 6. Apart from the he submits that though the FIR was lodged against unknown person but on perusal of the statement of the 2025:UHC:5617 victim, it appears that she is always giving contradictory statement and she, in fact, knows the applicant very well. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the present applicant is serving in Army and is languishing in jail since 24.12.2024 and the charge-sheet has already been filed, and as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant. 8. On the other side, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application by submitting that, in fact, the applicant was arrested on suspect, and, thereafter, during the TIP, the victim identified the applicant, however, he has not disputed this fact that there are various contradictions on the statement of the victim. Apart from this, he has also not disputed this fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed and as such there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, and, furthermore, he also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 9. After hearing the argument as advanced by learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2024 and the charge-sheet has already been filed, and as such, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the present bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant, namely, “Prashant Mehta,” be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 02.07.2025 R.Bisht 2025:UHC:5617