SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS UKHC010111862026 2026:UHC:5815 UKHC010111862026 BA1/1133/2026 Danish --Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. Mr. Mohd. Safdar, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Tumul K Nainwal, learned AGA, for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present applicant – Danish S/o Ikram, is praying for bail in reference to FIR dated 18.12.2025 bearing FIR No.0347 of 2025, Police Station Kaliyar Sharif, District Haridwar, which was lodged by one Mohd. Azam, implicating the present applicant for the offence punishable under Section 137 (2) of BNS, 2023. This FIR was investigated, and on culmination of the investigation, the applicant has been chargesheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 137 (2) and 87 of BNS, 2023 read with Sections 11 (iv)/12 of the POCSO Act. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the victim though minor have not support the case of the prosecution, which is evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023. He further submits that the victim was not agreed for her internal examination and there is no any evidence with regard to the sexual assault. He further submits that in fact the applicant was in love with the victim, which she admits in her statement. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.03.2026 and has no criminal antecedents. 5. On the previous date, learned State Counsel was directed to verify the statement of the victim as recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 which has been placed on record along with the bail application. Today, Mr. Tumul K Nainwal, learned AGA submits that on perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, she has not supported the case of the prosecution. Learned AGA also submits that there is no medical report regarding internal examination of the victim and the chargesheet has already been filed. 6. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the chargesheet has already been filed and the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and furthermore the victim in her statement have not support the case of the prosecution though it is completely the subject matter of the trial, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 7. In such view of the matter, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Danish, be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 15.07.2026 Nitesh/