Uttarakhand High Court

Mohammad Abdullah vs State Of Uttarakhand on 11 July, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

    HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
           Second Bail Application No. 04 of 2025
                             In
              Criminal Appeal No.717 of 2023

Mohammad Abdullah                                          ......Appellant

                                Versus


State of Uttarakhand                                       ....Respondent

Present:
            Mr. Saurav Adhikari, Advocate for the appellant.
            Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and order

dated 20.09.2023, passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2022, State

of Uttarakhand Vs. Mohammad Abdullah, by the court of Special

Sessions Judge (POCSO), Pithoragh. By it, the appellant has been

convicted under Section 384, 509 IPC, Section 13 read with 14 (1) of the

Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ("the Act") and

Sections 67A and 67 B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ("the IT

Act" and sentenced as hereunder:-

(i) Under Section 13 read with 14 (1) of the Act: to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five

years with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-. In default of

payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment

for a further period of one year.

(ii) Under Section 384 IPC: to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for a period of three years with a fine of

Rs.10,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six

months.

(iii) Under Section 509 IPC: to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of three years with a fine of

Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo

simple imprisonment for a further period of six

months.

(iv) Under Section 67 A of the IT Act: to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for a period of three years with a fine of

Rs.2,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period

of one year.

(v) Under Section 67 B of the IT Act: to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for a period of three years with a fine of

Rs.2,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period

of one year.

The appellant has sought bail in this appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

Heard on Bail Application No. 1 of 2025

3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

appellant has been imposed maximum five years of imprisonment. He

has already undergone three years in custody. There are less chances of

appeal to be heard in near future.

4. These facts are admitted by learned State counsel.

5. Having considered, without adverting much on merits, this

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

should be suspended and the appellant be enlarged on bail.