HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No.1113 of 2023 Yogesh …..….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Mohd. Umar, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Rangoli Purohit, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No.90 of 2023, dated 09.02.2023, under Sections 354, 323, 504 IPC and Sections 7/8 and 9/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the FIR, on 08.02.2023, the applicant took the victims in the forest and sexually assaulted them. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that out of the 17 witnesses only 05 witnesses have been examined; this is the incident of the year 2023; the allegations are not grave; both the victims have been 2 examined. Learned counsel would also submit that the witnesses are not appearing despite warrants that have been issued by the court. 5. Learned State counsel would admit that the victims have already examined. Out of the 17 witnesses till now, only 05 witnesses have been examined. She would submit that the victims have supported the prosecution case. 6. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion at this stage is to be avoided. To the extent of appreciating the controversy the matter may be examined with the caveat that any observation made at this stage shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the case. 7. According to the victims, when they were plucking leaves when the applicant took them into the forest, under the pretext that he would get them good leaves and, thereafter, he inappropriately touched them and, in fact, wanted to kiss them. Both the victims had already been examined in the year 2023. It is submitted that last witness was examined on 17.12.2024. 8. These facts are admitted by the learned State counsel. It makes out the case for bail. 3 9. Having considered the nature of offence and the delay caused in the matter, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount; to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 11.02.2025 Sanjay