2026:UHC:2861 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA2 No.296 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mohd. Safdar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Pal, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand. 2. This is second bail application moved by the applicant, seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No.643 of 2023, under Section 363, 366-A, 376 A, B of I.P.C. and Section 5(m)/6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun. 3. The first bail application moved on behalf of the applicant was dismissed by Coordinate Bench of this Court, on 09.01.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in judicial custody since 25.06.2022. It is further submitted that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to the applicant at the time of arrest. It is also contended that the mother and sister of the victim have not supported the prosecution case in their deposition before the Court, and that no Test Identification Parade was conducted. It is lastly submitted that the applicant undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail and is ready to furnish adequate sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the bail 2026:UHC:2861 application and submits that the victim, examined as P.W.-1, has duly identified the applicant and has fully supported the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the arrest memo clearly records the grounds of arrest, specifying the offence alleged against the applicant. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mihir Rajesh Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra & another, reported in (2026) 1 SCC 500, to contend that the requirement of communicating grounds of arrest in writing is prospective in nature. Learned counsel further contended that the allegations are corroborated by medical evidence and that the Investigating Officer, upon due investigation, has found cogent and credible material against the applicant. 6. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, which pertain to a serious offence involving a minor victim, and considering that the victim herself has supported the prosecution case and identified the applicant during trial, this Court finds no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. The submission regarding non- communication of grounds of arrest does not, prima facie, vitiate the proceedings in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mihir Rajesh Shah (supra). Further, the prosecution case is prima facie supported by medical evidence as well as other material collected during investigation. At this stage, no such infirmity or contradiction 2026:UHC:2861 is apparent which may persuade this Court to take a different view. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application is rejected. (Alok Mahra, J.) 20.04.2026 Arpan ARPAN JAISWAL Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb 7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB98744 6351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL Date: 2026.04.20 16:30:16 +05'30'