2025:UHC:5177 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. 817 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Saddam’ S/o Mustafa is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 02.03.2025 bearing FIR No. 77 of 2025 P.S. Piran Kaliyar Sharif, District Haridwar, wherein, in total 11 persons were implicated for the offences punishable under Section 16/17 and 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3, 5, 6 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Section 144 r/w Section 64 of BNS, 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated ,which is evident from the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR and furthermore he submits that as per the prosecution three victims, who were minor, in their statements disclosed the name of one Mustafa and other one Aadil but all of them changed their version on their re-examination and in place of Mustafa and Aadil they disclosed the name of the applicant and one Asif. 5. He further submits that without any substance based on the changed version of the three victims applicant has been implicated and the charge-sheet has been filed, though, as per the prosecution Mustafa is the main accused, who is still absconding. 6. He further submits that so far as the present applicant is concerned the investigation has already been completed since the charge-sheet has been filed and against the accused person, who are absconding the investigation is going on, therefore, at this juncture there is no need of the custodial interrogation of the present applicant. 7. On the other side, learned A.G.A. Mr. Sandeep Sharma submits that the three co-accused 2025:UHC:5177 persons Mustafa and Aadil are still absconding and though Asif was earlier absconding but now recently arrested. 8. Apart from this, learned State counsel have not disputed this fact that the charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant, therefore, there is no need of the custodial interrogation of the present applicant and further he has not disputed this fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 9. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that since the investigation against the present applicant has already been completed and as such there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant and furthermore the applicant has no previous criminal history, 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 bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant ‘Saddam’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 12. The grant of bail to the present applicant will not be treated as a precedent in respect of the remaining accused persons. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 19.06.2025 PR 2025:UHC:5177