HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Bail Application No. 8 of 2025 Sunny ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant Sunny is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 349 of 2024, under Sections 323, 376, 452, 506 IPC, P.S. Pathri, District Haridwar. He has sought his release on bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the FIR, the applicant had been raping the victim for three months prior to lodging of the FIR. On 05.06.2024, at 10:00 in the morning, the applicant forcibly entered into the house of the victim and assaulted her. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the entire case is false; the victim was staying in her brother-in-law’s house; the victim was in relationship with the applicant; she would send romantic messages to the applicant, which she has admitted in her examination before the court, when the relationship was revealed to her brother-in-law, he beaten up the victim and a case was cooked up against the applicant. 5. Learned State Counsel would submit that the victim has supported the prosecution case; her statement is supported by the medical report. But, she admits that according to the victim, she used 2 to send romantic messages to the applicant, but, learned State Counsel submits that, according to the victim, she used to send the romantic messages under compulsion. 6. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial, or in any other proceeding. 7. The victim in her cross-examination has admitted that she used to send romantic messages to the applicant. What was the need for it? What was the compulsion? How the applicant compelled the victim to send romantic messages? These and many more questions would fall for consideration during trial. 8. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. The bail application is allowed. 10. 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) 14.05.2025 Avneet/