Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand on 19 March, 2026
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL. Dat
or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No. e
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
CRLA No. 116 of 2026
With
Bail Application (IA No. 01 of 2026)
Anis Ahmed
--Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
--Respondent
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J., Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel for the Appellant.
2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
3. The matter is taken up for hearing on the Bail Application filed by the Appellant.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the Bail Application (I.A. No. 01 of 2026).
5. The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 20.02.2026, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Dehradun, in Special Sessions Trial No. 10 of 2021, State vs. Imran @ Tota and Others, relating to offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376, and 506 of the IPC, and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Sahaspur, District Dehradun, in Case Crime No. 317 of 2020.By the said judgment, the learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 506 IPC and sentenced him to undergo three months' imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo fifteen days' simple imprisonment. The appellant has also been convicted under Section 21 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo three months' imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo fifteen days' simple imprisonment.
6. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant was enlarged on interim bail by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 20.02.2026. It is further submitted that the Appellant is not a previous convict and was on bail during the trial and never misused the liberty granted to him.
7. Learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the liberty so granted to the Appellant was never misused, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that sufficient grounds exist for granting bail to the Appellant.
9. Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed. Let the Appellant be released on bail upon his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
10. It is clarified that the grant of bail shall not be treated as a ground for seeking unnecessary adjournments or for delaying the disposal of the present Criminal Appeal.
11. The main ground for consideration of the present Criminal Appeal, as submitted by learned counsel for the Appellant, is that there are inconsistencies in the statements of the material witness, who has not supported the prosecution version.
12. Admit.
13. Summon the Trial Court record. After receipt of the same, the Registry is directed to prepare the paper book and supply the same to learned counsel for the parties in accordance with the Rules.
14. List this case on 29.05.2026.
(Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.) 19.03.2026 Shiksha