2026:UHC:3227 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1288/2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Parikshit Saini and Mr. Karan Singh Dugtal, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The first bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant seeking grant of regular bail in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No. 557 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 65(1) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(a), 4(2), 5(1)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the victim alleging that his daughter had been missing from the morning of 09.07.2024. During the course of investigation, the victim was recovered from the company of the applicant, and upon completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge-sheet against the applicant. 6. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; that, though the victim, in her 2026:UHC:3227 statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., supported the prosecution version, however, during trial, in her examination-in-chief as well as cross-examination, wherein the victim, examined as PW-1, has stated that her earlier statements were made under pressure of her family members; that, similarly, the complainant (PW-3) has not supported the prosecution case and has stated that the F.I.R. was written at the instance of villagers and has denied the allegations. It is thus contended that there are material contradictions in the testimony of the star witnesses, which substantially weaken the prosecution case. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 13.07.2024; that, the applicant has no criminal antecedents; that, the charge-sheet has already been filed; and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. It is also submitted that the bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the court below vide order dated 01.07.2025, however, in view of the subsequent developments in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the bail application, but does not dispute that the applicant is in custody since 13.07.2024 and that the material witnesses have been examined during trial. 9. Having considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of 2026:UHC:3227 accusations, the evidence on record, particularly the testimony of the victim and the complainant who have not supported the prosecution case in material particulars, the period of incarceration already undergone by the applicant, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant, Salman be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Alok Mahra, J.) 28.04.2026 Mamta MAMTA RANI Digitally signed by MAMTA RANI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6a812005bebfcf46f244f3e584af1449e430ef9 00bf09a6d67ebbd642671329b, postalCode=263001, st=Uttarakhand, serialNumber=5de1751a4f1d9cabfd54852c9e68911c a8b66dd26690a191648ab5d8dd004ef0, cn=MAMTA RANI Date: 2026.04.29 18:50:20 +05'30'