Mahesh Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 4747 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Mahesh Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 9 October, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

             Criminal Appeal No. 592 of 2025
                                  With
     IA No.1 of 2025 For Bail and Suspension of Sentence
                         Application

Mahesh Singh                                            ...... Appellant

                                  Vs.

State of Uttarakhand                                 ..... Respondent

Present:
Mr. Vishal Vikram Singh, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Prabha Naithani,
Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, D.A.G. for the State of Uttarakhand.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The instant appeal has been preferred against

judgment and order dated 19.09.2025, passed in Special Sessions

Trial No.12 of 2024, State Vs. Mahesh Singh, by the court of

Special Sessions Judge (POCSO Act)/ Sessions Judge,

Champawat. By it, the appellant has been convicted and

sentenced under Section 354 IPC and Section 7/8 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. He has

been sentenced to 4 years' simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.

25,000/- under both the offences separately.

2. Heard.

3. Admit.

4. Call for the LCR.

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

to learned counsel for the parties, as per rules.

6. List on 18.12.2025 for final hearing.

7. Heard on Bail and Suspension of Sentence

Application (IA) No.1 of 2025.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

there is no witness of the incident; at the time of incident, the

appellant was not present at the alleged place of incident; the

appellant was on bail during trial; he has never misused the bail

granted to him.

9. Learned State Counsel very fairly concedes that

the victim has not supported the prosecution case at trial. On

being asked, she also submits that there is no eye witness of the

incident, but, according to her, the victim has proved the case in

her statement given under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973.

10. 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.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. The sentence appealed against is suspended

during the pendency of the appeal.

13. 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.) 09.10.2025

Ravi Bisht