Faheem Qureshi Alias Badshah ... vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 2161 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Faheem Qureshi Alias Badshah ... vs State Of Uttarakhand on 21 February, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Misc. Bail Application (IA) No.01 of 2024
                        In
        Criminal Appeal No. 821 of 2024

Faheem Qureshi alias Badshah ........Appellant/Applicant

                                    Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                              ........... Respondent



Present : Mr. Zafar Siddique, Advocate for the appellant/applicant.
          Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State.


                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the

judgment and order dated 29.11.2024, recorded in

Criminal Case No.63 of 2020, State of Uttarakhand vs.

Faheem Qureshi alias Badshah, by the court of FTC/

Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO,

Haldwani, District Nainital. By the impugned judgment

and order, the appellant has been convicted and

sentenced under Sections 363, 366 IPC. The appellant

has preferred the bail application.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. Admit.

4. Call for the LCR.

5. List for final hearing on 21.05.2025.

6. Heard on Criminal Misc. Bail Application (IA)

No.01 of 2024.

7. According to the prosecution case, the

appellant had kidnapped the victim, a young girl from her

house on 02.03.2020 at 08:00 PM and took her along

with him. He established physical relations with her on

multiple occasions. When he wanted to take the victim

out of country, he was apprehended. After prosecution

evidence, by the impugned order, it was held that the

prosecution has not been able to prove charges under

Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3) IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

But, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced

under Sections 363, 366 IPC.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant would

submit that the appellant has been sentenced to five

years imprisonment; he has already been in custody for

04 years 11 months and 18 days; he has been in jail

during trial.

9. The question that will fall for consideration is

that, as to whether the victim was really kidnapped? Or

the appellant facilitated the victim in her moving out from

her parents' home?

10. Having considered this and other attending

factors, this Court is of the view that it is a case in which

the execution of sentence should be suspended and the

applicant/appellant be enlarged on bail.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. The execution of sentence, which is under

challenge in this appeal shall remain suspended during

the pendency of the appeal.

13. Let the applicant/appellant be released on bail,

during pendency of the appeal on his executing a

personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each

of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court

concerned.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 21.02.2025 Sanjay