Saheed Ahmad ........Appellant/ vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 5667 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Saheed Ahmad ........Appellant/ vs State Of Uttarakhand on 20 November, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                  Bail Application (IA) No.01 of 2025
                                      In
                    Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 2025

Saheed Ahmad                                     ........Appellant/Applicant
                                     Vs.
State of Uttarakhand                                   ........... Respondent
Present : Mr. Harshpal Sekhon and Mr. Basant Singh, Advocates for the
          appellant/applicant.
          Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and

order dated 14.01.2025, passed in Special Sessions Trial No.77 of

2021, State of Uttarakhand vs. Saheed Ahmad, by the court of

FTSC/Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh

Nagar. By it, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under

Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 8 of the Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The appellant seeks bail during

pendency of the appeal.

2. Heard on Bail Application (IA) No.01 of 2025.

3. According to the FIR, the victim, a young girl of 17

years left her home on 23.09.2020 and she did not return.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that

the victim on her own has left her home on 23.09.2020 and the

applicant himself has brought her back to her home; there is no

allegation of sexual assault; inappropriate touch has been alleged.

He submits that the applicant and the victim, both were in

romantic relationship.

5. Learned State Counsel admits that factual narrations, as

given by the learned counsel for the applicant. But, she submits that

the victim was the minor and the she alleged that she has been

inappropriately touched by the applicant.

6. 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.

7. The bail application is allowed.

8. The execution of sentence, which is under challenge in

this appeal shall remain suspended during the pendency of the

appeal.

9. 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.

10. List in due course.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 20.11.2025 Sanjay