2025:UHC:5971 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. 898 of 2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Nishant Krishna Adhikari and Mr. Devaansh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present applicant ‘Sumit Gnagwar’ S/o Ramesh Gangwar is praying for bail in relation to First Information Report dated 20.11.2024 bearing FIR No. 328 of 2024 P.S. Transit Camp, District Udham Singh Nagar, which was lodged against the unknown person for the offence punishable under Section 140(3) of BNS, 2023. On completion of the investigation the chargesheet has been filed for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of BNS and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act. 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 victim herself in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNS, 2023 denied the case of the prosecution and clearly stated that she was staying with her uncle. 5. Apart from this, he also contended that the victim herself refused to go with the medical examination and there is no any evidence with regard to commission of rape. He further submits that the chargesheet has already been filed and the present applicant is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025 and as such there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant and the applicant have no previous criminal history. 6. On the other side, learned A.G.A. Mr. Sandeep Sharma oppose the bail application by submitting that the victim herself in her statement recorded under Section 180 of Cr.P.C. support the case of the prosecution and the victim was recovered from the possession of the present applicant after three months of the missing report; however, he has not disputed this fact that the 2025:UHC:5971 victim herself refused to go with the medical examination. 7. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that since the chargesheet has already been filed and there is no need of the custodial interrogation of the present applicant, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant ‘Sumit Gangwar’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 10.07.2025 PR 2025:UHC:5971