2025:UHC:2961 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/31/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Mukul Singh Dangi, learned counsel for the applicant through Legal Aid. 2. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant-Amar Kumar is seeking regular bail in relation to FIR dated 23.12.2020 registered as FIR No. 0354 of 2020 at P.S. Raipur District Dehradun wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376 IPC read with Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2020 and the charge sheet has already been filed and trial is also at a concluding stage, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation of the present applicant. Apart from this, he submits that the medical report does not support the case of the prosecution and even the victim in her cross-examination to some extent does not support the case of the prosecution which itself reveals that the victim was tutored by her mother. 5. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history. He further submits that though all the witnesses have been examined and the trial is at the concluding stage, however, an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the prosecution and 2025:UHC:2961 this information he gathered through online portal. 6. On the other side, Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. seriously opposed the bail application by submitting that the medical report in fact support the case of the prosecution and it is wrong to say that the victim was tutored by her mother. 7. Be that as it may, the State Counsel has not disputed this fact that the charge sheet has already been filed and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2020. 8. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, and further taking into consideration that the charge sheet has already been filed and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2020 and has no previous criminal history, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 9. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant Himanshu Kumar be released on bail on his executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 11. It is made clear that after being released on bail, the applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournment in the trial and will cooperate with the trial. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 22.04.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:2961