]SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2026:UHC:2317 BA1 No.294 of 2026 Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Vinay Bisht, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned AGA for the State. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime No.435 of 2025 under Section 65(1), 351(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, registered at P.S. Bajpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is resident of same locality. He submits that there is contradiction in the statements recorded under Section 183 and 180 of BNSS. It is stated that incident occurred on 16.12.2025 at 20:30 hours and the FIR was lodged on 19.12.2025 at 16:53 hours, which is approximately 68 hours delayed. It is stated that medical legal examination report does not support the prosecution version. It is stated that there exists a long animosity between the family of the applicant and family of the prosecutrix and due to this reason applicant has been falsely roped in, in the present crime. 6. Learned State counsel vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that in the statement recorded under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS the minor victim has made specific allegation against the present applicant. He submits that victim was medically examined and statement of doctor was recorded and according to the school certificate of the victim collected by the Principal she was minor at the time of incident. Learned State counsel submits that it is a heinous crime which comes under the category of POCSO, thus the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. As the minor victim girl child has firmly supported the prosecution case and has named the applicant of having tormented her with explicit sexual assault; there being no reason to disbelief the statement of the minor girl child victim at this juncture. Accordingly, bail application is rejected. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 31.03.2026 Arti