Salman vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 2789 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Salman vs State Of Uttarakhand on 23 May, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
      IA No.1 of 2024 For Delay Condonation Application
             IA No.2 of 2024 For Bail Application

              Criminal Appeal No. 652 of 2024

Salman                                                 ...... Appellant

                                 Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                               ..... Respondent

Present:

Mr. Siddharth Bankoti, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.



Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The instant appeal has been preferred against

judgment and order dated 01.03.2023, passed in Special Sessions

Trial No.144 of 2021, State of Uttarakhand Vs. Salman, by the

court of Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional Sessions Judge,

Dehradun, District Dehradun. By it, the appellant has been

convicted and sentenced under Sections 354D, 506 IPC and

Section 11/12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences

Act, 2012. It is delayed. Delay Condonation Application, IA No.1 of

2024, has been filed.

2. Heard on Delay Condonation Application.

3. Having considered, this Court is of the view that

the delay in preferring the appeal may be condoned.

4. The delay in preferring the appeal is condoned.

5. The delay condonation application is allowed.

6. Heard on Admission.

7. Admit.

8. Call for the LCR.

9. Once LCR is received, let paper book be provided

to learned counsel for the parties, as per rules.

10. List in due course for final hearing.

11. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.2 of 2025.

12. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit

that the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to the

maximum of 3 years of imprisonment. The appellant has already

undergone more than half of the period of sentence. He would also

submit that there are less chances of hearing of the appeal in near

future.

13. Learned State Counsel admits that the appellant

has already undergone about 18 months of the period of sentence.

14. Having considered, 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.

15. The bail application is allowed.

16. The sentence appealed against is suspended during

the pendency of the appeal.

17. The appellant be released on bail during the 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.) 23.05.2025

Ravi Bisht