2026:UHC:1289 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 / 1 4 7 2 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Alok Mah r a, J. Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel and Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned legal aid counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. along with Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Applicant–Abdul Samad@ Samad is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 345 of 2024, registered under Sections 376(3), 354(d) and 506 of the I.P.C. and Sections 5(1)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, at Police Station Vikasnagar, District Dehradun has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. was lodged alleging that the accused allegedly followed the victim home from school over a period of time. It is also alleged that the accused caught the daughter of the complainant in a garden and raped her forcefully and have recorded obscene videos of the victim during the assault and threatened to kill her 2026:UHC:1289 if she disclosed the incident to anyone. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that the applicant has falsely been implicated and is innocent; that he is in judicial custody since 19.11.2024; that, no such video has been presented as evidence on record to prove the offence; that, the bail application filed before the court below was dismissed vide order dated 08.06.2025; that, the applicant has no previous criminal history; that, there is no D.N.A./FSL report on record to prove the alleged offence; that, the applicant is a permanent resident of District Dehradun and there is no likelihood of his absconding; that, since the charge-sheet has been submitted, there is no possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses; and that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. On these grounds, prayer for grant of bail has been made. 7. Per contra, learned State counsel vehemently popposes the bail application and submits that grave and serious allegations of rape of a minor have been levelled against the applicant and the offence under the POCSO Act is clearly attracted. It is further submitted that the prosecution case is corroborated by the statement of the victim. Hence, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail at this stage. 2026:UHC:1289 8. Considering the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the allegations against the applicant are of a grave and serious nature. The victim is stated to be a minor aged about 13 years, and the offences alleged include Section 376(3) I.P.C. and Sections 5(1)/6 of the POCSO Act, which carry stringent punishment. The statement of the victim supports the prosecution case. 9. At this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and having regard to the gravity of the offence, the age of the victim, and the nature of accusations, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of bail. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. ( Alok Mahr a, J.) 25.02.2026 Mamta 2026:UHC:1289