2 1 . BA] 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 2026:UHC:3622 BA1 No.555 of 2026 Ajay @ Rajat Kumar Vs. State of Uttarakhand Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Shivam Gulati, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Chitrarth 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.226 of 2025 under Section 65(1) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 3(a) & 4(2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, P.S. Kotwali Gangnahar, District Haridwar. 4. The FIR is lodged with the allegation that on 31.05.2025 when the informant alongwith his wife went to Dehradun and on 01.06.2025 when he came back he saw present applicant entered into the house by jumping over the wall and committed rape on the daughter of the complainant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that medical examination of the victim does not support the prosecution case. He submits that there are major contradiction in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 of BNSS and 183 of BNSS; there is delay of ten hours in lodging the FIR. He submits that there is dispute between the family of informant and present applicant. He further submits that applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 02.06.2025. 6. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that victim was minor on the date of incident. He submits that victim was medically examined by the doctor and according to the statement of doctor hymen was found torn. He further submits that the victim in her statement clearly stated the involvement of accused and version of the victim has also been supported by sister of the victim. He further submits that it is a heinous crime and bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 7. Having heard the rival contention of the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, bail application is rejected. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 12.05.2026 Arti