SL. No. Dat e Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 2026:UHC:2658 BA 1st No.236 of 2026 “Sandeep Vs. State of Uttarakhand” Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Pranav Singh, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. N.S. Kanyal, learned AGA with Mr. Manoj Chandra Bhatt, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. In the High Court of Uttarakhand, the present case arises from Bail Application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail for the Applicant – Sandeep, who has been accused in Case Crime/FIR No.166 of 2025, dated 28.05.2025, under Sections 351 (3) and 65 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section ¾ of the POCSO Act, and under Section 9/10 of the Child Marriage Restrain Act, at Police Station Vikasnagar, District Dehradun. 4. The prosecution story based on the FIR is that the victim/minor girl child was taken away by the Applicant – Sandeep, on pretext of side scene to the State of Haryana and thereby illegally got her married on 07.02.2025. It is further alleged that the Applicant forcefully made physical relations with the victim and thereby committed an offence of rape against her, despite her having resisted to the same act. Resulting in a case having been registered against the Applicant for the crime of enticing a minor child and taking her away from the legal guardianship of her parents, performing an illegal marriage with a minor girl child. Thirdly, for the offences of aggravating penetrative sexual assault/rape against a minor girl child. 5. The main ground is for consideration of the bail as submitted by the learned counsel for the Applicant is based on the testimony of the minor girl child, which was made in camera before the learned Trial Court, and it is said that victim did not support the prosecution story in any manner. It is said that she has categorically denied that she was taken away with somebody inducing some intoxicant in her cold drink and thereby making her unconscious and that it may have caused access or liberty to the culprit (Applicant), and thereafter she may have been abused physically; which she claims nothing of this kind ever happened. Certified copy of the said statements of the victim has been furnished by the learned counsel representing the Applicant, at this juncture while hearing the bail application. 6. Bail application has been objected on behalf of the learned State Counsel opposing the bail, at the outset, with the contention that it is serious offence towards a minor girl child. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, at this juncture, this Court finds it a fit case for bail as the victim herself has denied the entire prosecution story all the allegations that has been levelled against the Applicant. 8. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the Applicant - Sandeep, who has been accused in Case Crime/FIR No.166 of 2025, dated 28.05.2025, under Sections 351 (3) and 65 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section ¾ of the POCSO Act, and under Section 9/10 of the Child Marriage Restrain Act, at Police Station Vikasnagar, District Dehradun, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court. The Applicant shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty granted to him. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 15.04.2026 Nitesh/