Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3043 (UTT)

RAMVILAS v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/20/2026 · 2026-03-25

Ashish Naithani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

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.20 of 2026 Ramvilas Vs. State of Uttarakhand Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned legal aid counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Chittrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present bail application is filed by the applicant, who is in judicial custody in connection with FIR No.79 of 2025 under Section 137(2), 65(1) of BNS and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, P.S. Patelnagar, District Dehradun. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. According to the FIR daughter of the informant, aged 15 years was missing from the morning of 13.02.2025 who had gone for work and since then never reached home. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 28.02.2025. He submits that statements of the victim were recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS wherein she made statement in favour of the applicant and stated that applicant had not forced her for anything. 7. Learned State counsel strongly opposed the bail application and submits that though victim has stated in favour of the applicant but at the time of the incident victim was minor and the matter comes under the category of POCSO Act. He submits that it is a heinous crime and applicant should not be granted bail. 8. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties, this Court does not find any good ground to allow the bail application of the applicant. Accordingly, bail application is rejected. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 25.03.2026 Arti