Sundar Mehto vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 3545 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Sundar Mehto vs State Of Uttarakhand on 4 April, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
                Bail Application No. 03 of 2025
                               In
                Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2025


Sundar Mehto                                         ......Appellant

                               Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                ....Respondent

Present:
            Mr. Mukul Singh Dangi, Advocate for the appellant.
            Mr. Manisha Rana Singh, D.A.G. for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and

order dated 11/12.09.2024, passed in Sessions Trial No. 27 of 2022,

State of Uttarakhand Vs. Sundar Mehto, by the court of Special Judge

(POCSO)/ Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dehradun. By it,

the appellant has been acquitted of the charge under Sections 363,

366A IPC and Section 5 (l)/6 of the Protection of Children From

Sexual Offences Act, 2012. He has been convicted under Section 376

IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of

ten years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to

undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month. The

appellant seeks bail in this appeal.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

4. According to the prosecution case, the victim, a young

had left her home on 07.01.2022, but she did not return. It is a

prosecution case that the applicant who enticed the victim and

established physical relations with her.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

victim and her mother both have not supported the prosecution case.

They were declared hostile.

6. Learned State counsel would submit that there is a

forensic report, which connects the appellant with the offence.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the DNA report

has not been proved.

7. Having considered, without adverting much on merits,

this Court is of the view it is a case in which the execution of sentence

should be suspended and the appellants be enlarged on bail.

8. The bail applications are allowed.

9. The sentence appealed against is suspended during the

pendency of the appeal.

10. The appellant be released on bail, during the pendency of

the appeal, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two

reliable sureties by each one of them, each of the like amount, to the

satisfaction of the court concerned.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 04.04.2025 Jitendra