Uttarakhand High Court
Rihan vs State Of Uttarakhand on 25 August, 2025
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
25th AUG., 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 683 OF 2024
Rihan .......Appellant.
Versus
State of Uttarakhand .......Respondent.
Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel.
Counsel for the State : Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate
General with Mr. R.K. Joshi, learned
Brief Holder.
ORDER:
(per Mr. G. Narendar, C.J.)
Bail Application (IA No.01 of 2024)
Heard learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant
and learned Deputy Advocate General.
2. The appellant/ applicant is before this Court being
aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 16.10.2024, sentencing him to undergo five
years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-
under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and in default
of payment of fine, to undergo additional simple
imprisonment for a period of one month.
3. The allegation, in a nutshell, against the
appellant/ applicant is that he was riding Honda Activa
scooter and the co-accused was riding pillion; that they
went to the house of the victim and the victim joined them
on the scooter; the appellant/ applicant rode the scooter
and all the three reached Mussoorie and in Mussoorie, he is
alleged to have dropped the victim and the co-accused and
returned back to Dehradun. This act of riding the scooter is
construed as constituting an offence of kidnapping.
4. It is not the case of the prosecution that the
victim was lured or induced to accompany them, and; that
she was restrained by the appellant in any manner. Her
statement is that she rode pillion. Whether she was riding
behind the appellant/ applicant, or whether she was riding
behind the co-accused, is not forthcoming; that the
allegations are that they are travelling on the main road. If
that be so, it is not the case of the victim that she sought
help or that she was prevented from seeking help.
5. Prima facie it appears that she has travelled on
her own will without any inducement or compulsion or
allurement. The appellant has been imposed punishment of
five years rigorous imprisonment, and has already
undergone incarceration for a period of one year and two
months.
6. In that view of the matter and also in view of the
fact that there are no similar prosecution pending or any
other criminal antecedents, we deem it appropriate to allow
the bail application (IA No.01 of 2024) and suspend the
sentence.
7. Accordingly, the interlocutory application is
allowed and the operation of the sentence imposed on the
appellant in Special Sessions Trial No.90 of 2022, passed by
the Additional District & Sessions Judge/ FTSC (POCSO),
Dehradun, is hereby, suspended.
8. The appellant- applicant is directed to be set at
liberty, if not required in any other case, subject to the
appellant- applicant executing a self-bond for a sum of
Rs.20,000/- and furnishing one surety for the like sum to
the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate.
________________
G. NARENDAR, C.J.
___________________
SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
Dt: 25th August, 2025
NISHANT
