Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/221/2022 on 30 August, 2025
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
SL.
Date or directions
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
CRLA No.221 of 2022
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. Avidit Noliyal, learned counsel for the
Appellant/Applicant.
2. Mr. K.S. Bora, learned Deputy Advocate
General assisted by Mr. Prabhat Kandpal,
learned Brief Holder for the State.
3. Present bail application has been moved
on behalf of the Applicant/accused. The
applicant is in judicial custody in connection
with Case Crime No.148 of 2015 for the offence
punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) IPC
and Section 6 of Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act (for short POCSO Act)
registered at Police Station I.T.I., District
Udham Singh Nagar.
4. The Applicant-Iliyas is under conviction
as per the judgment and order dated
02.06.2022/04.06.2022 passed by learned
FTSC/Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur
Udham Singh Nagar in Special Session Trial
No.304 of 2019 whereby under Section 363 IPC
applicant was convicted and sentenced to
undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment with
a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default stipulation
one month's additional rigorous imprisonment;
under Section 366 of IPC three years' rigorous
imprisonment with a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in
default stipulation one month's additional
rigorous imprisonment; under Section 376(2)
IPC ten years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine
of Rs.5,000/- and in default stipulation two
months' additional rigorous imprisonment and
under Section 6 of POCSO Act ten years'
rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-
and in default stipulation two months' additional
rigorous imprisonment was imposed. The
benefit under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. had been
granted to the Applicant/accused whereby the
period already undergone was to be considered.
5. Learned State counsel opposed the bail
application with prime objection that at the time
of incident the victim was only 13 years old and
she was holding the foetus of 26 to 28 weeks
which substantiates the gravity of the offence
under the POCSO Act regarding aggravated
penetrative sexual assault against the victim and
as such the applicant/accused was rightly
awarded the said sentence of ten years rigorous
imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.5,000/-.
Learned State counsel requested that applicant
should not be enlarged on bail.
6. Whereas learned counsel for the
Applicant/accused makes as submission that as
per today, the victim is major and about 24 years
of age. He makes a statement that when the
Applicant/accused was apprehended for the said
offence the pregnancy of 28 weeks resulted in a
baby boy that was fathered by the
Applicant/accused. Learned counsel for the
Applicant/accused further submits that the
Applicant/accused has been incarcerated for
more than four years and this itself is the ground
for bail.
7. Without going into the merits and
considering the purpose of incarceration i.e.
about more than four years applicant is entitled
to be released on bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed. Let the Applicant-Iliyas be released on
bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two
sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of
court concerned subject to the condition:
(i) The applicant shall not misuse the
liberty of bail.
(ii) He shall appear before the court
below as and when required.
(iii) He shall not temper with the
evidence or influence the witnesses.
9. List this appeal after two weeks.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
30.08.2025
Arti
